Sure, living in the same space, or under the same cultural/moral structures, a group could classify themselves as a united front, acting "as one".
It's a little more that a single unified front. People are part of each other, and we are made up of others. The "we" space is both made up of the "I" space, and becomes part of the "I" you identify as. In this regard, you are not a 100% "you". You are a collective in your individual skin sack. Self identity, includes the other in you.
But its no more than an idea, in the end.
It's actually an objective reality.
And what I was referring to is the "spiritual" one-ness that so many people allude to. For which there is only circumstantial evidence - and is mostly held up by those who are hopeful that we are connected by more than just common ideas/ideals.
This is of course a poor understanding of what this is. Firstly, it's experiential. That's not circumstantial evidence. That's tangible, real data. What you do is listen to what those who have experienced this describe, cross-culturally, and then you can map it out and see actual objective data and consider that as real evidence. Maps into these types of experiences have been created by legitimate researchers. Additionally, it can be reflected in what goes on in the brain, so it's not "just being hopeful". Something real is happening. Your idea it's just "wishful thinking" or something like that, does not hold up to the actual research.
What is in dispute is whether or not I can tap into your brain, or you into mine - or that we can exchange anything outside of real, physical substance or non-physical ideas/emotions.
I don't think there is a dispute at all. Does anyone claim we can? I don't use the word "Oneness" to mean I can read your mind. Who is claiming this? That's not what oneness describes. That's telepathy.
I can't be you... you can't be me. The imagination is the only place where you can suppose what it would be like to not be tethered to your body.
Yes, imagination is what is going on here. Where did you get this idea that "oneness" means I'm suddenly another person in their skin sack? I don't know any mystic that claims that!
To my mind, the human consciousness is a combination of energy signals bouncing around an array of physical storage cells. Each person's is formed independently of any other's, to the point that the physicality of your brain is entirely different than the physical aspect of mine.
You're confusing consciousness with thought patterns. Everyone has consciousness. Our mental realities constructed linguistically will of course vary from person to person. Every blade of grass is unique, and not unique. They all use photosynthesis however to get food for themselves.
We are each a unique interface, to a unique storage of data. Your interface wouldn't necessarily work with my data, and vice versa.
Yes, but we do communicate our unique datastores using common interfaces. We use hermeneutics to translate what is communicated from one vessel to our own. No one is claiming
unmediated access into others brains!
In other words, I feel that the true thing that humans identify as "self" - this conglomeration of physical elements and energetic activation - is ultimately trapped within the organic material of our bodies.
"I feel" being the operative words here. Mystics on the other hand experience that we are more than just our thoughts about ourselves, or others thoughts about us. We experience a connection that transcends just our individual skin sacks, yet that does not translate into some magical mind-reading thing.
We like to pretend we have the ability to "reach outside", but more often than not I would say that most occurrences where someone feels that thy have can probably be attributed to intuition, or your subconscious putting the pieces together for you - so that it seems as though "you read someone's mind", or you "predicted an event".
I'm thinking your understanding of what mystical experience needs some improvement. What you have been talking about is not "oneness" but magical thinking.
