So it is something. I should instead say it (I) doesn't have any features except to observe and is only itself because there are things to observe. It is like the sky to the clouds; without the sky there wouldn't be any clouds, but the sky is only a something insofar that there are things in it.I said observer.... Observer means you are the oneobserving an object or experience.
Who is the Observer?
Posts
Total:
52
-->
@EtrnlVw
I'd say that is a more extrapolated version of what I said in my first post.
Divine spark.
Hehehe
That is correct, and unless some video or other recording.measuring equipment is capturing the event, then it will not be observed.Lol, so when you close your eyes you are no longer observing?
you no longer exist?
Yes, I still exist but I am no longer observing myself.
So no, no eyes needed to observe or be the observer read that definition again.
Here is the definition again, please read it and try to understand it
Observe - to see, watch... to see or learn something... to watch, view, or note for a scientific
Without eyes you still observe and perceive your being, you still exist, you're an observer.As you can see, my eyes are required to observe.
No, I cannot observe without my eyes, no one can. Existing and observing are two different things.
Are you saying blind people do not perceive, or observe? They are both aware and conscious.
Blind people cannot observe, by definition. Being aware and conscious are entirely different things.
Once again, you really need to get a dictionary and read it.
eyes are not needed for an observer.
Yes, they are required, by definition of seeing and watching. Its right there in the definition of the word.
Ears are not needed for you to exist and observe
Lol, Ears are for hearing, not observing.
likewise you as an observer exist independently of the brain and body. Independent of the eyes, ears ect ect.
That is entirely false, completely wrong, by definition and biology.
The consensus is that when we see (take that as including hear,touch ,smell etc) something, signals from our sense organs travel to our brains.
There a pattern of neural activity is set up that encodes the information coming in from outside - that is some pattern of activity encodes "blue circle" which is different from how "red square" is encoded. Thus what we are aware of (or conscious of) is not really "objects out there" but of information, encoded as patterns of neural activity inside our brains.
The simple consequnce of that is that if "something out there" doesn't get encoded or gets wrongly encoded we don't see it, or we mistake what it is. On the other hand a 'neural representation' can turn up in a brain with nothing out there at all, producing a dream or hallucination.
The 'take away' is that awareness of X is not a guarantee that X physically exists in the world out there but it is a guarantee that a pattern of neural activity (a 'representation') of X physically exists inside your brain. We can trust our brain's 'virtual world' to be a fairly good approximation to the real world because otherwise we would have been eaten by critters with a more realistic world-picture!
Of course all that doesn't happen for fun - it evolved to help us survive and reproduce. That means the most important thing to represent in your brain's model of the world is your self. So each brain-owner has within their brain a global model of the world within which isan elemnt corresponding to their self. That arrangment is so familiar and inescapable to us that it is hard to put into words!
if it is not clear I'd happy to try to less opaque!
-->
@keithprosser
The consensus is that when we see (take that as including hear,touch ,smell etc) something, signals from our sense organs travel to our brains.
I'm not arguing how the physical body works or what it senses and how those senses correlate with the human experience. I'm arguing for the one observing the senses of the body, the one that observes all experience through the bodies. The brain and body cannot create and is incapable of producing that inner awareness or conscious being that is impossible as it exists independent of the body, mind and brain and has been shown to for ages through NDE's and spirituality. My own experiences indicate it so as well. So why cling to a farce when you have always had the real thing?
There a pattern of neural activity is set up that encodes the information coming in from outside - that is some pattern of activity encodes "blue circle" which is different from how "red square" is encoded. Thus what we are aware of (or conscious of) is not really "objects out there" but of information, encoded as patterns of neural activity inside our brains.
I know how neural activity works, but what it doesn't do is transform into a conscious being, or a sentient observer.
-->
@Shed12
I don't have any qualities.
You will always have the quality of awareness, of being aware. That is a something, and that something is YOU. What you do and what you believe is not who you are, you are a creative, conscious being with or without a body. What you hear, what you see and feel is not who you are. You are the one observing all those things.
I am saying it is not a thing like observed things. The "awareness, consciousness or soul" doesn't have any appearance and isn't itself observable. Or else it would be observed and make itself not an observer.
I didn't say it was an observed thing or object. I said observER, not the things being observed. It wouldn't matter if the actual soul was observable or not, you are still aware that is what the soul is, your experience as an observer is a quality. However, that soul takes on bodies and layers of form to experience in the created universes.
If observation takes place all the time and there must be something that observes, then I guess I can't say the observer is nothing without also implying we do not observe. So instead I'll say that the things I observe also observe me and that observed things are not other than an observer or else without one there is not the other.
My point here, is that you are the observer...a being, a soul that exists independent of the human body. The topic I created was to point out what that is and where it originates.
The brain and body cannot create and is incapable of producing that inner awareness or conscious being
You are denying a well known fact.
My own experiences indicate it so as well.
Your experiences are clearly wrong and you need to understand that.
I know how neural activity works, but what it doesn't do is transform into a conscious being, or a sentient observer.
You are very wrong about that.
-->
@Shed12
So it is something. I should instead say it (I) doesn't have any features except to observe and is only itself because there are things to observe. It is like the sky to the clouds; without the sky there wouldn't be any clouds, but the sky is only a something insofar that there are things in it.
What my topic is asking, is for you to articulate what that observer is and why it exists, where did your conscious being come from? what is it made of? of course I have my own propositions that is what we are going to discuss if you disagree with me. So yes, it sounds like you do in fact acknowledge that it is a something. That is a good start. It is more than a something though, you are a creative conscious entity. Everything you do and experience is the result of that reality first.
So again, I'm not arguing the difference between observed things and the observer. I'm trying to get you to look at what the observer is and why it exists.
It comes from the brain.where did your conscious being come from?
-->
@RationalMadman
While there is a huge grey area in the study and almost entirely unexplored field of 'what makes us aware' and complete obscurity regarding how to separate us from personhood-facade Artificial Intelligence (AI), there is still far more proven likelihood that it is the physical brain that causes the experiences personhood and not the experience that results in the brain.
Completely untrue and the evidence suggests otherwise, and if you have accepted that I'm going to assume you can explain then how that works. All studies can show and indicate are the results of conscious activity within the brain and I supplied an analogy why this is the case in this very thread, they can't prove or demonstrate that activity transforms into a conscious being and never will. How does the brain create a conscious being through some neurons firing? as you put it. That would be akin to believing your vehicle drives itself and somehow produced/created the driver...At what point can you show your accepted theory becomes a conscious living entity? I would appreciate though if you don't post links that you have never examined. I'm not doing all the work, I would be glad to explain how this works for ya. But first you need to either present and actual argument or ask me questions. Other than that thanks for the opinion. I am surprised however, that Mister conspiracy theorist buys into the status quo materialistic farce that a brain can create a conscious being with no proof or even a legit explanation as to how that is possible.
I never said an experience results in the brain, the bodies exist so that the conscious soul can experience through that body. Consciousness exists independent of the body, mind and brain. However, awareness always comes before matter and it is by that awareness that both we and the universes exist.
-->
@EtrnlVw
Your brain is first stimulated by an outward object before you realise you have perceived it. Your brain first has produced a thought before you are aware you are having it. Want more? Want me to prove the, just stated, 2 things to be true?
Cars do drive themselves because they've been given Artificial Intelligence; a brain, your analogy fails.How does the brain create a conscious being through some neurons firing? as you put it. That would be akin to believing your vehicle drives itself and somehow produced/created the driver.
Consciousness exists independent of the body, mind and brain.
That is entirely false, you are denying a well known fact.
-->
@EtrnlVw
I know how neural activity works, but what it doesn't do is transform into a conscious being, or a sentient observer.
No one has worked that out fully, but I began to sketch out a mechanism in my earlier post, which you omited from your reply.
Of course all that doesn't happen for fun - it evolved to help us survive and reproduce. That means the most important thing to represent in your brain's model of the world is your self. So each brain-owner has within their brain a global model of the world within which isan elemnt corresponding to their self. That arrangment is so familiar and inescapable to us that it is hard to put into words!
Suppose that 'out there' is a red square but because of some glitch what gets encoded in your brain is a blue circle. You are going to be aware of a blue circle. I other words what 'seems to be' (ie blue circle) does not have be what is (red square).
I think it is impossible to put into words what one is aware of that we label 'self', but let's say that 'conscious being', 'sentient observer' comes into it..
From the previous paragraph, the fact we seem to be conscious and sentient in a mysterous way doesn't mean we are really cnscious and sentient in that mysterus and seemingly impossible way; all it means is that our brains represent themseves as such.
It may be impossible for brains to really implement consciousness as it seems to be, but not impossible for brains to support the repreentation of such consciousness.
Its the same difference as between making an actual faster-than-light space ship(impossible) and making a sci-fi movie about one (easy).
-->
@Mopac
I'd say that is a more extrapolated version of what I said in my first post.
But it is vague because you said you don't know what that is. You don't need to be vague you can know precisely what all things consist of.
Divine spark.Hehehe
Well the soul is a conscious entity created by the One, so it's not just a spark, it's a being. This being or soul is sent as a seed out into the worlds of duality to experience life in the created worlds and to express that Divine spark. Do you know what that Divine spark is BTW? that "divine spark" departed in every soul is the creative imagination specifically. This is the spark that defines the uniqueness of the individual soul.
-->
@keithprosser
I know how neural activity works, but what it doesn't do is transform into a conscious being, or a sentient observer.
No one has worked that out fully, but I began to sketch out a mechanism in my earlier post, which you omited from your reply.
I omitted it because it was not an explanation for consciousness and what you are, so it was not needed. "No one" (as you put) who is examining consciousness from a material medium no, will never work that out fully. The reason it is not worked out is because brains do not create conscious beings, they only confine ones experience to a body. Why tap dance around it when the soul can be fully articulated and understood how it enters and exists independent of physical forms?
Of course all that doesn't happen for fun - it evolved to help us survive and reproduce. That means the most important thing to represent in your brain's model of the world is your self. So each brain-owner has within their brain a global model of the world within which isan elemnt corresponding to their self. That arrangment is so familiar and inescapable to us that it is hard to put into words!Suppose that 'out there' is a red square but because of some glitch what gets encoded in your brain is a blue circle. You are going to be aware of a blue circle. I other words what 'seems to be' (ie blue circle) does not have be what is (red square).
All you really did was support my analogies about the brain being a conductor and component (like of a circuit board) and not a creator of conscious beings. I'm not denying the usefulness of the brain and what it does and how it correlates with our experience here. What I am denying is what you admitted above, it has never been worked out how consciousness exists, only that is not true for spirituality it has been articulated for a very long time.
I think it is impossible to put into words what one is aware of that we label 'self', but let's say that 'conscious being', 'sentient observer' comes into it..From the previous paragraph, the fact we seem to be conscious and sentient in a mysterous way doesn't mean we are really cnscious and sentient in that mysterus and seemingly impossible way; all it means is that our brains represent themseves as such.It may be impossible for brains to really implement consciousness as it seems to be, but not impossible for brains to support the repreentation of such consciousness.
It is not impossible because it is simplistic by nature. Being aware, conscious is precisely what it is, you are observing experiences. That is what a soul is, a conscious expression of the Creator playing in the worlds of duality. What distinguishes the soul, is the creative imagination and the perceptions the soul takes on through experiences.
Its the same difference as between making an actual faster-than-light space ship(impossible) and making a sci-fi movie about one (easy).
What is impossible is neurons firing creating a conscious being lol.
-->
@EtrnlVw
It isn't my intention to be anything other than vague.
I'm not trying to get in your way.
-->
@Mopac
What do you mean? you're not in the way. If you don't want to discuss it that's fine.
-->
@Mopac
Something you disagree with?
-->
@EtrnlVw
I don't think so.
Why is that impossible when it's a well known fact?What is impossible is neurons firing creating a conscious being lol.
10 days later
Goldtop, well know speculation you mean?
"Higher consciousness is the consciousness of a higher Self, transcendental reality, or God. It is "the part of the human being that is capable of transcending animal instincts".[1] The concept was significantly developed in German Idealism, and is a central notion in contemporary popular spirituality. However, it has ancient roots, dating back to the Bhagvad Gita and Indian Vedas.
Almost all religions have a concept of higher consciousness in at least some sects. It was first mentioned in recorded human history in the Sanskrit Hindu texts, the Upanishads." (which was probably between c. 800 BCE and c. 500 BCE)
Spirituality has examined and covered the nature of consciousness for countless generations, it is within the arena of spirituality that consciousness can be articulated and understood. The first source to expound on this reality was Indian scriptures but has been widely proposed in almost every religion. Is this a coincidence or does spirituality have the upper hand in understanding the nature of our being and our awareness? perhaps it can reach what a materialistic proposition cannot....
"These texts provide the basic source for many important topics of Indian philosophy and all major philosophical themes are covered in their pages. In general they remain neutral among competing interpretations and they attempt to integrate most of the opposing views regarding philosophical and spiritual matters.
The purpose is not so much instruction as inspiration: they are meant to be expounded by an illuminated teacher from the basis of personal experience. In fact, one of the first lessons that we learn in the Upanishads is the inadequacy of the intellect. Human intellect is not an adequate tool to understand the immense complexity of reality. The Upanishads do not claim that our brain is entirely useless; it certainly has its use. However, when it is used to unlock the great mysteries of life, the eternal, the infinite, then it simply is not enough. The highest understanding, according to this view, comes from direct perception and intuition.
The Upanishads tell us that the core of our own self is not the body, or the mind, but atman or “Self”. Atman is the core of all creatures, their innermost essence. It can only be perceived by direct experience through meditation. It is when we are at the deepest level of our existence.
Brahman is the one underlying substance of the universe, the unchanging “Absolute Being”, the intangible essence of the entire existence. It is the undying and unchanging seed that creates and sustains everything. It is beyond all description and intellectual understanding.
One of the great insights of the Upanishads is that atman and Brahman are made of the same substance. When a person achieves moksha or liberation, atman returns to Brahman, to the source, like a drop of water returning to the ocean. The Upanishads claim that it is an illusion that we are all separate: with this realization we can be freed from ego, from reincarnation and from the suffering we experience during our existence. Moksha, in a sense, means to be reabsorbed into Brahman, into the great World Soul."