Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
There's a general claim that its the brain who observes all the activities done by that human body. Fine.
If so, then at the very same moment who observes, that the brain observes ?
And tells this to whom ?The brain is aware of itself.
Interpret whom, or what ?Sounds like a "must be" fallacy, I'll call it. The brain doesn't observe it's the seat and control. We think the mind observes but it's just a result of the brains picking up on external and internal sensors and using language to interpret. All from the brain.
I missed to write this option.But how did you get a "who" though? Why not what?
The milkman.And tells this to whom ?
Interesting take. What if one loses all senses and cellular/neural communications?The brain is aware of itself.
There's no awareness without conciousness, except maybe lucid dreaming?Interesting take. What if one loses all senses and cellular/neural communications?
I observe that "my" brain observes "my" activitiesThere's a general claim that its the brain who observes all the activities done by that human body. Fine.
If so, then at the very same moment who/what observes, that the brain observes ?
There's a general claim that its the brain who observes all the activities done by that human body. Fine.
If so, then at the very same moment who/what observes, that the brain observes ?
For those who don't have inner dialogue, it's all just intuitive.
"I"I observe that "my" brain observes "my" activities
"I"
What is this "I" ?
The brain is aware of itself.
There's no awareness without conciousness, except maybe lucid dreaming?
Unless you're talking about brian death/vegetative state.
Either wizardry or sorcery. Not sure which.How?
Is that the claim I made?Do you have evidence that consciousness is inherent in all senses and cellular/neural communications?
Speaking as a non-dualist, I would say that ‘the brain’ and ‘observation’ are two ways of referring to the same thing.
This is obvious to anyone who has been anaesthetised.
If there is a spiritual identity beyond the brain, it ceases to know itself when the brain is shut down.
There is no yogi who can remain in a state of ‘higher consciousness’ when anaesthetised, based on my experience, and based on zero reports of such an experience. With the exception of ketamine, which leaves the deep lizard brain active. Which, btw, seems transcendental...
So, it makes no difference whether you attribute consciousness to brain activity or spirit ... no brain activity equals no awareness of any kind.
Meaning that that if there is a ‘supernatural’ spiritual basis to our existence, it relies on a brain to know anything at all.
Is that the claim I made?
There's no awareness without consciousness...