maybe it is because nobody is focusing on the conscious and the unconscious units-and i am still not clear on whether there is any difference between consciousness and awareness. i thought awareness was the basic element-and as soon as it manifests it becomes conscious of whatever it has manifested (or transcended itself into).
so let's say the unconscious is unaware of the conscious and each of these two parts are aware of different existences, one focusing on the outer world and one on the inner world, the rhizome where all the consciousness has access to its individual splinters. sometimes they spill over into each other's territory; ideally they would be working in unison. with our intellect we may be able to discover what both of them are doing. not to mention the part of the brain that controls the heartbeat and all the bodily functions...also, there is intelligence (another term, where does that one fit in the puzzle?) in every cell of the body-there is cellular memory, i suspect. wouldnt it be something if we knew everything each one of our cells knows?
(KJ-i know i am thinking like a cartoon explanation made for children now. with the background you have you can probably explain all my mistakes without even looking anything up.)
but on to the metaphysical part:
so let's say there isnt any such thing as a soul. does it matter? suppose we die and then our memory, our sense of i-ness, everything is gone. what is left is all the other people, animals, plants, minerals that still go on sharing the same intelligence unit. and eventually everything dies, and nothing will be left but the original awareness with nothing to be conscious of. does it matter?
i think the thing that made me change my way of thinking and made me feel at peace, and develop a much better moral character than i ever had, was the perception that all is one. that means the ego is only an illusion created by the apparent separation of bits of intelligence into separate vantage points. we are one, and whatever hurts you hurts me. whether or not there is anything that goes on after death doesnt really change anything for me. i can conceive of that being proved which is ok.
"Do you think the light he saw was really God?? comment directed at all??"...alan
i think if he wants money he never saw any light at all...
I think we all know the principles of the mind but as science is no where near understanding consciousness its not really relevant mentioning the mechanics of the mind.
It appears (at least, but I could be wrong) that this had been directed towards my post above it. This will bring out a few questions; I'm sure.
From my experience, far too many people do not take the time to connect all the dots [not pointing to anyone here--just talking about cases I had seen reports on], and most of those evidently have not spent much quality time doing research in the neuroscience/psychology fields. I have found that even beyond those very few (population wise, as well as clinical death experienced cases [[/i]you see, there are many clinical death cases with all the exact circumstances wherein no such mental reactions occur[/i] ]) cases of NDEs, people in general lack a good working knowledge of the principles and facts of mind/brain.
And then the question, if I may (again, neither to cast any doubt nor negative aura on anyone, but simply to ask that our cards be honestly laid out on the table) what background study and data can you present, or demonstrate, xris, to support your claim that we 'are no where near understanding consciousness' so as to make explanations on what brain does, irrelevant when talking about brain events?
The reason for my having mentioned the matter of different experiences due to different lifetime experiences, is because, what is stored in memory, is what is used in memory playback--it is as factual a truth as one can get, and is by no means a mere callus tort due to any prior disbelief.
A 'life changing experience,' no matter what it may be, will be any event which causes a person to adopt a new 'course,' or 'outlook,' on life. That much need not be remarked on because, simply, it is what it is in the subjective experience (there is no need to place a value judgment on it in either direction). To make any attempt, on the other hand, to understand why such an experience can happen even in non-life threatening situations (such as simply when undergoing anethesia, where there is no near death element at all), or why it is that we'll have real time earth things like rivers, certain plants, buildings and clothing, in an otherwise supposed neither world, we'll have to first take a neutral stance, and investigate the several avenues of thought. This has been done on a very large scale, actually.
If all the people who had had NDEs had actually died, even those undergoing some quite routine surgery, trust me, we would never ever have had any such concept, much less term--near death experience. It is a fact that not a single one of these people had ① or has died in any way at all, so the first avenue to investigate, would only logically be the brain events that could possibly lead to such experience.
Also, regarding the strength of visual and emotional aspect, we get the very same thing in patients who have damage to a certain area of the medial temporal lobe--and these are not folks who have experienced NDEs; it's simply how the brain works. There is no scoffing, this is serious
investigation; trust me. KJ
① Relative to the point at which they had reported their story, not this very point in time of posting.
I appreciate your considering the matter, xris. I can't seem to firmly make up my mind on just what to do here (on this thread, for now [go into detail here, or elsewhere...). Anyway, I can touch on a few things.
A lot more is known about brain and the brain than far too many people readily recognize (or, in some cases, wish to recognize). Consciousness itself is understood enough to be locked into brain (uncountable, collective noun). There is a lot more research to be done, of course, and there is a lot that comes up with each new bit learned, that leads to newer questions. Nevertheless, we have passed a certain point behind which, we have no need to press for more information on.
The reason I mentioned that these people had not died, was to point out that the living functioning brain had been there all along, very much unchanged--other than the level of conscious activity; that says a lot, actually ! It's not just the chemical actions, but the firing patterns and connectivity that really makes the difference, along with, especially individual, brain build.
If it were some unified universal, cosmic truth being experienced beyond the material brain, why would separate elements of cultural identity and personal history make any difference? Why would any immaterial world require manmade, material props--such as clothing and vehicles and buildings? The most reasonable proposition in answer to these thoughts, would rationally be, 'because the experiences are only inner realities of the individual's material brain.' Further research coincides with this, thus even more greatly verifying the conclusion that it is simply the result of brain operation.
To save space and a lot of time, I hope you will allow room for the consideration that it is very much fact that conscious is a continuum (which might take a fair amount of research to 'visualize') and focus requires 'attention screens' (so to speak) to be thrown up. Sensory input does not stop at all (as long as the pathways are not severed or damaged so as to prevent connection) but acceptance of the trace is controlled by higher up systems--which is why all sense of pain, time, selfness, and sound can be shut out. It is, after all, the brain that is working as that organ has come to work through the continuum of ganglion structures all through evolutionary time. That's the way it is, really.
I'll try to carry this over to that other thread.
The brain is not the totality of a persons awareness. Consciousness in some forms survive death
I appreciate your considering the matter, xris. I can't seem to firmly make up my mind on just what to do here (on this thread, for now [go into detail here, or elsewhere...). Anyway, I can touch on a few things.
A lot more is known about brain and the brain than far too many people readily recognize (or, in some cases, wish to recognize). Consciousness itself is understood enough to be locked into brain (uncountable, collective noun). There is a lot more research to be done, of course, and there is a lot that comes up with each new bit learned, that leads to newer questions. Nevertheless, we have passed a certain point behind which, we have no need to press for more information on.
The reason I mentioned that these people had not died, was to point out that the living functioning brain had been there all along, very much unchanged--other than the level of conscious activity; that says a lot, actually ! It's not just the chemical actions, but the firing patterns and connectivity that really makes the difference, along with, especially individual, brain build.
If it were some unified universal, cosmic truth being experienced beyond the material brain, why would separate elements of cultural identity and personal history make any difference? Why would any immaterial world require manmade, material props--such as clothing and vehicles and buildings? The most reasonable proposition in answer to these thoughts, would rationally be, 'because the experiences are only inner realities of the individual's material brain.' Further research coincides with this, thus even more greatly verifying the conclusion that it is simply the result of brain operation.
To save space and a lot of time, I hope you will allow room for the consideration that it is very much fact that conscious is a continuum (which might take a fair amount of research to 'visualize') and focus requires 'attention screens' (so to speak) to be thrown up. Sensory input does not stop at all (as long as the pathways are not severed or damaged so as to prevent connection) but acceptance of the trace is controlled by higher up systems--which is why all sense of pain, time, selfness, and sound can be shut out. It is, after all, the brain that is working as that organ has come to work through the continuum of ganglion structures all through evolutionary time. That's the way it is, really.
I'll try to carry this over to that other thread.
Alan, you have surely bitten a whole bunch more than you'd even be able to put in your mouth--much less chew--here, have you not?
Do you honestly feel that you can demonstrate how the brain is not the totality of a person's awareness...or, otherwise, what exactly you mean?
If consciousness does not survive slow wave sleep, then how on earth can it survive death?
KaseiJin Alan, let's consider this as carefully and honestly (and pragmatically) as we can, then. Alan, have you ever somatically died? I mean have you been without heartbeat, blood circulation, air intake (ventilation), and glucose intake for a period of at least 180 minutes?
KJ you are talking about the diferent functions of the brain and relating them to consciousness.There is no one place in the brain that can be pointed to and say thats where you are aware.Its like making the assumption the driver of a car is somewhere in the ignition.If you cant find it dont pretend you can.
There are many false trails in this search and scientists make false ones just as much as those who believe in an ethereal reason for them.
There is a discrepancy between what maybe considered as nde,s and what others may consider are.You fail to make it clear that the brain is a liquid entity and chemicals within the brain play a large part in its operation.You refuse to make the giant leap to believe we may have an unexplainable experience and merely try to drip feed these side shows of the brains workings as if that disproves the experience.
I approach it from a point that it is possible, you say its impossible.Try inventing a system that has an ethereal controller within a physical frame work that has to operate in this existance.You would need all the attributes of the brain ,you could not exist in any one place in that machine,you are there as a influence, to observe and experience.You cant find me in the machine im not there.Cut one part of my brain out i loose that ability to operate in that portion of the brain, then seeing it as observer the conscious mans disappearance appears to give the impression the "i" was there,he is there but not there, unable to function.
My theory is, contact between the two at sometime needs to be disconnected,death, the soul is tied by life and can not escape only by death does it become free.When death is imminent, the brain has certain chemical messages that instigate these images that relate to the real experience of death.It is a film show that introduces you to death, it can take many forms but it is usually based on your life experiences.
I have had to formulate these ideas by experiencing things beyond the real world of certainties and this is my answer.
Why do you draw a line at 120 minutes and yes I have been in that death state . . .
I think I had drawn the general line starting from 180 minutes. If a person has no heartbeat AND no blood being pumped by machine AND no air ventilation (that is no machine pumping oxygen into your body--which never happens anyway, if the blood is not being pumped . . . and we can drop the cell food...because basically, if your blood is not circulating [even if it's less blood volume], the cell food is gonna do extremely little good) , for a period of at least 180 minutes (that's at least 3 hours under those above conditions, please keep in mind) that person will most likely never be resuscitated. That is somatic death.
I recall your story (published on a different thread) and feel for you--as I know the circumstances and the tragaedy. My heart goes out to you on that.
It is true then, as you have shared with us, Alan, that you did not die. Your brain may have recieved some damage, but probably nothing so big as to notice (beyond normal brain build for Bipolar Disorder). What that then leads to, is not the conclusion that you have experienced death, but that you have never experienced death, just as not a single person living on the face of the earth at this moment has ever experienced death. It's a simple fact.
You had mentioned in your earlier post that you have seen your physical body from outside your body. I would like to ask if you would attempt an explanation of how a non-body can see; although it might also be best on that other thread.
