Vitalism vs. mechanism

And yet, the most profound achievments are always made without any percieved "I". Do you suppose that a master violinist has a concept of "I" doing the playing during the actual performance? If such a mindfulness of self arises during his performance he is likely to make mistakes, because it is a distraction. I am not a violinist, but I have played the guitar for almost 30 years, and I know from experience that when my playing is at its best there are no distinctions between "I" and anything else. There is just perfect action.

But you see the "I" is being...it is a "vector" ! The thinking on the "I" , or the thinking of the "I" are also yet another and another "vector"...both cases, always a convergence of the world in "there" ! (True nonetheless)

The "I" is illusion, even though it is a useful one. But give it too much emphasis and it will give you grievances. And your insistence that this illusion is present in every moment of your perception is simply not right.

You confuse the causes of the "I" and the justifications of the "I" with the "I" itself...the "I" is an effect, and that which justify´s it is the very same which justify´s what the "I" perceives...no matter what, the fact still is true independently on how you describe it...

Which fact is that?

The problem on the correspondence of Truth, that is, knowledge, is not in the correspondence but in knowing exactly to what it actually corresponds...Truth is there either way...

The fact that whatever you perceive, is being perceived, and such that in that sense, it is real, real only for what you perceive...what other beyond what you perceive is the real to correct perception ?

The relationship of perciever and the percieved.

Thas is...none.
Well, thanks for the interesting debate Cyr.
See you tomorow.

Ye, thanks Fil.
And good morning

But what do you mean "that is.. none"?

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

This is a link to TED talks, where Jill Bolte Taylor, a brain researcher, shares the experience of when a blod vessel exploded in her left brain.

1 - Well that is perception...so no other knowledge then more perception is there for any of the "I´s" in which you delve into to correct perception...and no, the "I" effect is not less real only because it results from a multitude of inter linked factors and chemical reactions...or because you can have more then one...

2 - Thanks for the link, I had the pleasure of seeing this video a couple of months ago, she is amazing is n´t she ?

It's as real as a rainbow.

Exactly or do you have any doubts about the realness of rainbows ?...

Do you know how rainbows "work"?

Hi !
Thank you for that subject and all your forum, I really like it and had a nice time reading everything
If you want you can check my site too (http://www.evilandgood.com/) to discuss about philosophy.

I guess you are not talking about leprechauns and gold pots...I suppose I know more about wave length them most if that´s what you are referring to...

I turn I would very much like to know what is not real in a rainbows Cyr ?
Again I guess you are the one which is not giving sufficient weight to the meaning of words, which results in a dangerous trade...
...a mirage still is a real mirage...

You haven´t explain yet, not even close to it, what would "real" be about in turn...

Rainbows don't "work". It is the visual experience of the beholder that works.

You are a victim of what you think you know.

A rainbow is nothing at all. It is beads of moisture in the air, and when the sun hits them they fracture the light. Now, if you are standing in a specific location you will see part of this fracturing of light as a rainbow, but if you move, the rainbow moves too. It is not in the air, it is only in your perception. It is the relationship of sunlight and your eye, via moisture in the air that gives the illusion of a rainbow.
And yes, it is a real illusion, and I have said that "I" is an illusion, not that it is not real...



That might be the case. But have you considered the possibility that you may be doing it too? And bear in mind please the inherent ambiguity of language.

No Cyr it is not most certainly an illusion !!!
It is a visual phenomena in which what you observe has a well known cause !!!
...or are you implying that the light fragmentation seen in the rain is not happening anywhere ? maybe you believe one can only see rainbows when one is dreaming but that is not my problem !

More:

...if you want to be accurate what is really happening is a huge succession of rainbows in the entire area in which the light is refracting, but given your position you can only observe a certain amount of the spectrum...don´t take me for a naive realist, nor am i so uniformed as you might ingenuously believe...is just that there is a limit to the nonsense of questioning everything...I might just as well start questioning the questioning itself...I dislike dead ends and this is beginning to look like one... there is said !