Liberal Naturalism

[Ouroboros]

Here's the definition from Encyclopedia Britannica:

Double-aspect theory, also called dual-aspect theory, type of mind-body monism. According to double-aspect theory, the mental and the material are different aspects or attributes of a unitary reality, which itself is neither mental nor material. The view is derived from the metaphysics of Benedict de Spinoza, who held that mind and matter are merely two of an infinite number of “modes” of a single existing substance, which he identified with God.​

 

[George-ananda]

Then you're not quite understanding what I'm saying.


Dual-aspect:
In the philosophy of mind, double-aspect theory is the view that the mental and the physical are two aspects of, or perspectives on, the same substance. It is also called dual-aspect monism.

Neither the physical nor the spiritual are primary, and yet both are together the primary.

Maybe I can rephrase my great divide by posing the question: Can subjective consciousness exist without a physical brain?

This question might clarify the divide better.

 

[Ouroboros]

Maybe I can rephrase my great divide by posing the question: Can subjective consciousness exist without a physical brain?

Human consciousness cannot.

Any other consciousness wouldn't be a human consciousness and the term "consciousness" would be meaningless.

This question might clarify the divide better.

The divide isn't there. It only seems to be. To divide them is to think of it in human terms and experiences. I believe the "divide" is what causes conflicts. To see the symmetry and unity of the "divided" parts is to finally see the whole.

I think that's as far as I can explain it.

 

[George-ananda]

Human consciousness cannot.

Any other consciousness wouldn't be a human consciousness and the term "consciousness" would be meaningless.


The divide isn't there. It only seems to be. To divide them is to think of it in human terms and experiences. I believe the "divide" is what causes conflicts. To see the symmetry and unity of the "divided" parts is to finally see the whole.

I think that's as far as I can explain it.

Maybe this question better defines the 'great divide' I still believe exists; Does some form of our human consciousness continue after death?

 

[Ouroboros]

Maybe this question better defines the 'great divide' I still believe exists; Does some form of our human consciousness continue after death?

The key is "human". In that sense, and if we're talking about an unique instance of one person's consciousness, no. Not in the sense of traditional religion.

Actually, I don't think we have the same level of consciousness at all times either. When I sleep, I'm not in the same state of consciousness. Neither am I when I'm dreaming, or daydreaming, or studying, or playing games, or watching a movie, or mediate, or listen to some wonderful music. So it comes and goes during the day. It's non-continuous, fleeting, and constantly changing during the day and life. So to ask if it continues after death only leads to the question, which one of the states of consciousness? Perhaps one of the lower forms or higher forms do, maybe not. So some form might continue, but the exact same (or same ones that I have now) most likely will not, because they're integrated and co-dependent on the physical experience that I'm having. When I'm dead, then I'm not me the same way anymore and can't experience that same me.

 

[George-ananda]

The key is "human". In that sense, and if we're talking about an unique instance of one person's consciousness, no. Not in the sense of traditional religion.

Actually, I don't think we have the same level of consciousness at all times either. When I sleep, I'm not in the same state of consciousness. Neither am I when I'm dreaming, or daydreaming, or studying, or playing games, or watching a movie, or mediate, or listen to some wonderful music. So it comes and goes during the day. It's non-continuous, fleeting, and constantly changing during the day and life. So to ask if it continues after death only leads to the question, which one of the states of consciousness? Perhaps one of the lower forms or higher forms do, maybe not. So some form might continue, but the exact same (or same ones that I have now) most likely will not, because they're integrated and co-dependent on the physical experience that I'm having. When I'm dead, then I'm not me the same way anymore and can't experience that same me.

OK, I might be getting closer now to defining the great divide. You are on the 'No' side and I am on the 'Yes' side of this divide.

In my view, our soul consciousness incarnates the physical/astral/mental bodies we call us and at death the astral/mental continue without the clunky, troublesome outer physical shell (as reported in NDEs, etc.). Now, there are also other understandings on the 'Yes' side of the divide.

 

[Ouroboros]

OK, I might be getting closer now to defining the great divide now. You are on the 'No' side and I am on the 'Yes' side of this divide.

Ok. That I probably can agree with.

I also have to say that it's not easy to explain my views because I'm not quite sure I have figured them out myself yet. Some of it arises from my thoughts when we discuss.

In my view, our soul consciousness incarnates the physical/astral/mental bodies we call us and at death the astral/mental continue without the clunky, troublesome outer physical shell (as reported in NDEs, etc.). Now, there are also other understandings on the 'Yes' side of the divide.

Sure. My problem is that we have physical that shows no manner of human consciousness. Animals have different levels of awareness, but they're not human kind. Do rocks have consciousness as well? What do we mean with consciousness as part from the physical? If it's separated from, and different from, then how do we have the physical at all and how does it emerges from the conscious? (I'm trying to figure out a bit about your views now, if you don't mind.)

 

[George-ananda]

Ok. That I probably can agree with.

I might be getting somewhere.

My problem is that we have physical that shows no manner of human consciousness. Animals have different levels of awareness, but they're not human kind.

agree

Do rocks have consciousness as well?

I think you can call it that but it is very different than ours. Maybe the whole planet itself has a type of consciousness very different from ours but I am not clear on all that.

What do we mean with consciousness as part from the physical?

Did you mean 'apart' as opposed to 'part'? Anyway, an example would be an astral/mental body separated and observing and understanding floating above the physical body (as in the NDE). Another example would be a non=physical entity speaking telepathically with a medium.

If it's separated from, and different from, then how do we have the physical at all and how does it emerges from the conscious? (I'm trying to figure out a bit about your views now, if you don't mind.)

In Advaita thought, Brahman is pure consciousness and the only Real. The various physical and above the physical planes are part of a creative play/drama of Brahman in which He separates Himself from Himself in Act I and returns Himself to Himself in Act II. Why? Why do humans create and experience art? The various physical and above the physical planes are ultimately a temporary illusion (Maya in Hinduism). Brahman experiences finite consciousness by incarnating finite forms.

It's not easy to explain/grasp but I hope this helps.

 

[Ouroboros]

I might be getting somewhere.

Yup.

I think you can call it that but it is very different than ours. Maybe the whole planet itself has a type of consciousness very different from ours but I am not clear on all that.

Agree.

Did you mean 'apart' as opposed to 'part'? Anyway, an example would be an astral/mental body separated and observing and understanding above the physical body (as in the NDE). Another example would be a non=physical entity speaking telepathically with a medium.

It's possible, I believe, but I think it would be different kinds of awareness/consciousness.

In Advaita thought, Brahman is pure consciousness and the only Real. The various physical and above the physical planes are part of a creative play/drama of Brahman in which He separates Himself from Himself in Act I and returns Himself to Himself in Act II. Why? Why do humans create and experience art? The various physical and above the physical planes are ultimately a temporary illusion (Maya in Hinduism). Brahman experiences finite consciousness by incarnating finite forms.

I think my point is that pure consciousness is a better term than the term consciousness alone. Brahman would represent a different form of consciousness than the human kind. Saying just consciousness makes it sound like they're the same. Perhaps this pure consciousness is another word for the unifying thing from where human consciousness and physical world both stems from.

It's not easy to explain/grasp but I hope this helps.

I think so.

 

[George-ananda]

It's possible, I believe, but I think it would be different kinds of awareness/consciousness.


I think my point is that pure consciousness is a better term than the term consciousness alone. Brahman would represent a different form of consciousness than the human kind. Saying just consciousness makes it sound like they're the same. Perhaps this pure consciousness is another word for the unifying thing from where human consciousness and physical world both stems from.

Brahman is pure infinite consciousness. However, individual human/non-human consciousness is still the One Brahman consciousness animating finite forms giving them finite consciousness (as opposed to pure infinite consciousness). There is only One consciousness and One experiencer.

Here's an analogy. Electrical current is wired into your house. You may have a light bulb, a toaster, a vacuum cleaner, etc. but they are all animated by the same source (an electrical generator). The functioning of each device looks very different from each other but they are all animated by the same source current flow.

 

[Ouroboros]

Brahman is pure infinite consciousness. However, individual human/non-human consciousness is still the One Brahman consciousness animating finite forms giving them finite consciousness (as opposed to pure infinite consciousness). There is only One consciousness and One experiencer.

Ok.

Here's an analogy. Electrical current is wired into your house. You may have a light bulb, a toaster, a vacuum cleaner, etc. but they are all animated by the same source (an electrical generator). The functioning of each device looks very different from each other but they are all animated by the same source current flow.

Except that electricity doesn't cause or generate the cable it's flowing through.

 

[George-ananda]

Except that electricity doesn't cause or generate the cable it's flowing through.

Brahman creates the cables and even the appliances as the props for His play/drama of the universe. Matter and the universe is a creative thought form of Brahman.

 

[Ouroboros]

Brahman creates the cables and even the appliances as the props for His play/drama of the universe. Matter and the universe is a creative thought form of Brahman.

Which means that in your analogy, Brahman is not just the energy but also a cable maker. The point here is that matter isn't created by consciousness alone, but by energy and whatnot is more than just consciousness.

 

[George-ananda]

Which means that in your analogy, Brahman is not just the energy but also a cable maker. The point here is that matter isn't created by consciousness alone, but by energy and whatnot is more than just consciousness.

What is matter? Where did it come from? Why does it exist? I think of it as congealed consciousness (as I've heard others call it); others say it is thought-forms of Brahman.

 

[Ouroboros]

What is matter? Where did it come from? Why does it exist? I think of it as congealed consciousness (as I've heard others call it); others say it is thought-forms of Brahman.

Or information, which is popular with some scientists. Perhaps all things a born in the Akashic record.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Here's an analogy. Electrical current is wired into your house. You may have a light bulb, a toaster, a vacuum cleaner, etc. but they are all animated by the same source (an electrical generator). The functioning of each device looks very different from each other but they are all animated by the same source current flow.

Interesting analogy. The other possibility is a scenario where all the appliances have their own internal battery, or more accurately their own internal generator.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Interesting analogy. The other possibility is a scenario where all the appliances have their own internal battery, or more accurately their own internal generator.

So what happens when the batteries go flat or the generator runs out of fuel?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So what happens when the batteries go flat or the generator runs out of fuel?

Without fuel, machines and organisms cease to function.

 

[George-ananda]

Without fuel, machines and organisms cease to function.

But from my study of the afterlife and paranormal evidence that is not IMO what seems to happen to consciousness; but just the physical organism. The car and driver are not inseparably linked.

We each represent what I believe are the two different major schools of thought.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Without fuel, machines and organisms cease to function.

So the analogy does not work ....the machine and organisms must be animated by flowing electricity....if internally supplied...they would shut down as soon as the internal limited electric supply ran out...