Consciousness and Matter

[alissowack]

There is such thing as objective reality. How we relate to it is what makes it subjective. There is a certain "ownership" we should have in respect to our experiences, but it shouldn't come at the expense of confusing people into accepting a subjective reality as an objective reality. But, this confusion has been going on for a while and it's done a pretty good job of robbing ourselves of any reason to think that there are such things as absolute truths or ultimate realities. We live for ourselves without any reason to seek approval from something (or someone) outside of ourselves.

 

[Rock_Well]

If all reality was subject to individualistic interpretation we would be able to reverse death.

 

[Bodhi]

There is such thing as objective reality. How we relate to it is what makes it subjective. There is a certain "ownership" we should have in respect to our experiences, but it shouldn't come at the expense of confusing people into accepting a subjective reality as an objective reality. But, this confusion has been going on for a while and it's done a pretty good job of robbing ourselves of any reason to think that there are such things as absolute truths or ultimate realities. We live for ourselves without any reason to seek approval from something (or someone) outside of ourselves.

What is this objective reality?

 

[Bodhi]

If all reality was subject to individualistic interpretation we would be able to reverse death.

Not necessarily. No one has ever experienced death. The only death you've experienced is the death of others and even then, that is within your own consciousness/mind. You have not personally experienced death.

 

[Bodhi]

"All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration.

We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.

There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves"

-- Bill Hicks

 

[alissowack]

@WestBrooklyn. Objective reality are the things in life that regardless of our relations to or with it, it doesn't change the essence of it. This is a small example, but for the most part we know what the sky is or what is considered as the sky. However, because of our presuppositions, biases, and world views the sky is perceived to being something more or different than what it is.

 

[waterproof]

lol @ captain save'em all day @beenwize, he don't know nothing on the subject but came in with those draws on tight with his cape to Save faded righteousness and hate on @alissowack because he disagree with the only poster other than the oaphse brother to co-sign him.

 

[Bodhi]

@WestBrooklyn. Objective reality are the things in life that regardless of our relations to or with it, it doesn't change the essence of it. This is a small example, but for the most part we know what the sky is or what is considered as the sky. However, because of our presuppositions, biases, and world views the sky is perceived to being something more or different than what it is.

Have you ever heard of the double slit experiment? The observer is linked with the observed. In the experiment, the electron behaves differently based on the observer's presence. The sky, in reality, is linked with your consciousness. It is there because you are conscious.

 

[Bodhi]

=related
=watch_response

 

[Bodhi]

7 part video

 

[alissowack]

@WestBrooklyn. I could have sworn we were talking about objective reality in general terms. I'm sure there has been standards set in regards to the things of life that science has helped out with. But what does it mean in respect to how we "relate" to it?

Back to my sky example...and so I'm not trying to make it appear as if I am disagreeing...you could be right about all that you are trying to convey to me via YouTube (I may or may not look at them). But, what does that have to do with me and what I subject the sky to? Let's just say that one day I was looking at the sky and I suddenly felt at peace with life...and I began to think that this is a reality that everybody should have and start making the claim, "Look at the sky, for it will bring you peace!". Now, this is where you can argue that this is subjective for not everybody who looks at the sky will experience what I experienced. They may not experience peace...or their circumstance allows them to find peace in something else. But, the objective reality is that the sky is not going to change because I'm having a moment. There are standards in place that keep the sky from being manipulated by what I perceive it to be.

 

[alissowack]

And as I finished looking at this two part series...I really don't see how science is suppose to be the same as Buddhism. Science tries to take an objective perspective on the world and how it works while Buddhism suggests a subjective perspective; more personal and intimate. Science saying that the world is empty, as one, or not real is is not the same as Buddhism saying it. And I find it meaningless to even embrace Buddhism if even the religion itself is subjected to that same "emptiness". It is to say that even the Buddhists are not really believing in Buddhism for it is not real...yet you want people to know that Buddhism is real.

 

[Bodhi]

you could be right about all that you are trying to convey to me via YouTube (I may or may not look at them).

the youtube videos weren't in response to you

 

[Bodhi]

@WestBrooklyn. I could have sworn we were talking about objective reality in general terms. I'm sure there has been standards set in regards to the things of life that science has helped out with. But what does it mean in respect to how we "relate" to it?

Back to my sky example...and so I'm not trying to make it appear as if I am disagreeing...you could be right about all that you are trying to convey to me via YouTube (I may or may not look at them). But, what does that have to do with me and what I subject the sky to? Let's just say that one day I was looking at the sky and I suddenly felt at peace with life...and I began to think that this is a reality that everybody should have and start making the claim, "Look at the sky, for it will bring you peace!". Now, this is where you can argue that this is subjective for not everybody who looks at the sky will experience what I experienced. They may not experience peace...or their circumstance allows them to find peace in something else. But, the objective reality is that the sky is not going to change because I'm having a moment. There are standards in place that keep the sky from being manipulated by what I perceive it to be.

The fact that you are viewing the sky is subjectivity in itself because the sky has no inherent existence first of all. Secondly, your mind is creating the reality that the sky is there. If there were no observer present to recognize the sky as the sky, it would rest in the realm of infinite potential. That was my point and my question: Does consciousness create reality???

When you look at the sky, you see the sky. You can ask your neighbor to look in the same direction and to explain to you what it is that he/she is seeing. Your neighbor can then tell you what they are viewing but the entire scenario is happening within your own mind. Your consciousness is creating this reality, of not only the sky but the neighbor and your conversation with your neighbor.

 

[Rock_Well]

So Jesus reverses death - never to die again - and performs several miracles that defy all kinds of laws of the physical universe, and in the case where all reality is subject to the individual, we wouldn't expect to be able to do the same?

 

[Bodhi]

So Jesus reverses death - never to die again - and performs several miracles that defy all kinds of laws of the physical universe, and in the case where all reality is subject to the individual, we wouldn't expect to be able to do the same?

I guess certain things could be possible. I couldn't tell you what and which, because I've never done them. But I don't believe in a god so I don't believe Jesus had powers that any normal human being couldn't attain. Most stories about Jesus are most likely blown out of proportion and exaggerated for the purpose of portraying him as the son of God for the sake of Christianity.

 

[alissowack]

@WestBrooklyn. I could have sworn we were talking about objective reality in general terms. I'm sure there has been standards set in regards to the things of life that science has helped out with. But what does it mean in respect to how we "relate" to it?

Back to my sky example...and so I'm not trying to make it appear as if I am disagreeing...you could be right about all that you are trying to convey to me via YouTube (I may or may not look at them). But, what does that have to do with me and what I subject the sky to? Let's just say that one day I was looking at the sky and I suddenly felt at peace with life...and I began to think that this is a reality that everybody should have and start making the claim, "Look at the sky, for it will bring you peace!". Now, this is where you can argue that this is subjective for not everybody who looks at the sky will experience what I experienced. They may not experience peace...or their circumstance allows them to find peace in something else. But, the objective reality is that the sky is not going to change because I'm having a moment. There are standards in place that keep the sky from being manipulated by what I perceive it to be.

The fact that you are viewing the sky is subjectivity in itself because the sky has no inherent existence first of all. Secondly, your mind is creating the reality that the sky is there. If there were no observer present to recognize the sky as the sky, it would rest in the realm of infinite potential. That was my point and my question: Does consciousness create reality???

When you look at the sky, you see the sky. You can ask your neighbor to look in the same direction and to explain to you what it is that he/she is seeing. Your neighbor can then tell you what they are viewing but the entire scenario is happening within your own mind. Your consciousness is creating this reality, of not only the sky but the neighbor and your conversation with your neighbor.

When I think of subjectivity, I think of what it means in respect to what a person determines reality to be as oppose to a person affecting reality regardless of it. I'm sure that when scientists make observations, they are not going, "this will happen" or they know what the outcome is. They are wanting to know what will happen given any hypothesis they come up with. Those findings about "double slit" don't suggest to me scientists knew this was going on and were not intentionally trying to dictate what the next "thousand" will be like. These are objective findings. Now, if on their lunch break one of the scientists is like, "Man, this double slit experiment is amazing...it brings me joy; gives me purpose and meaning in life", then the experiment is determined by how it makes him (or her) feel...which in turn compromises the objective if the pursuit of these findings are just for pleasure.

There is a certain pleasure you seek in Buddhism and it gives you a certain satisfaction in your perspective to see how science corresponds. But if that is all, then it is just like the other religions you denounce; that it's just something to make you feel good.

 

[Bodhi]

.

There is a certain pleasure you seek in Buddhism and it gives you a certain satisfaction in your perspective to see how science corresponds. But if that is all, then it is just like the other religions you denounce; that it's just something to make you feel good.

Buddhism is a religion to attempt to decrease the amount of human suffering. It is realisitic imo as opposed to a theistic religion which is not realistic and increases suffering in the long run. But Buddhism is not what this thread is about, so let's leave it there.

I don't think you understand where I'm coming from with the thread. Without consciousness, there would be no form or names. Without names or forms there would be no consciousness. Consciousness itself is a subjective experience.

 

[alissowack]

Well, maybe it isn't, but you post videos that try to make parallels between Buddhism and science. It isn't showing how Buddhism reduces suffering. The unrealistic aspect of theism is not the idea of a deity itself, but the means in which mankind uses sometimes to promote the idea of a deity.

Consciousness is objective. The "who, what, when, where, how and why"'s of the experience is subjective. At the end of the day, we are either alive or dead and given what we know scientifically or common sense we can identify this.

 

[Bodhi]

Well, maybe it isn't, but you post videos that try to make parallels between Buddhism and science. It isn't showing how Buddhism reduces suffering. The unrealistic aspect of theism is not the idea of a deity itself, but the means in which mankind uses sometimes to promote the idea of a deity.

Consciousness is objective. The "who, what, when, where, how and why"'s of the experience is subjective. At the end of the day, we are either alive or dead and given what we know scientifically or common sense we can identify this.

Consciousness is the quality or state of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. It has been defined as: subjectivity, awareness, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.