The Nature of the Self

Your point being...?

Please, you have no way of knowing its source is anywhere in the physical realm.

If your arm is amputated, the nerve/brain connection is certainly altered, but that does not affect your consciousness ipso facto; you merely have less to be conscious of.

 

Isolating my comments and ignoring the rest of my post and then making snarky remarks is pretty disingenuous. Moreover, apparently you didn't read or comprehend that I said medication ALTERS the nerve/brain connection. From that you come to the false conclusion that I meant SEVERED nerves and you offer a totally non relevant example of a severed arm!!! Unbelievable!!

 

Not in the least. I cut out what I'm not responding to so as to make it clear what I am responding to.

Severing the connection isn't altering it?

Doesn't matter, as consciousness isn't necessarily altered by a local anesthetic either.

 

We are a complex organic life form that was created by and exists within the laws of this particular universe, a complex mathematical equation giving rise to a multitude of variables including subjectivity which gives us the notion of self. I find the word inherently in your last question inhibiting because I do not accept the premise of permanent. Not to mention the subjectivity of words like good and bad. I think the notion of self can hinder the expansion of perception but it can also prevent perception from completely unraveling. Without the notion of self how could one obtain enlightenment?

 

Except that the process begins during the experience of a fetus. Unborn babies suck their thumbs and do things with their hands. But they are't compelled to cope with the problems of independent physical existence until after birth.

 

Then it must be very easy for you to achieve the pure meditative state, or would that pursuit just aggravate your tendency?

Some speculate that evil was invented because of boredom. No ambition. No art, etc. Nobody was doing anything but listlessly floating around on a cloud.

The self is inherently bad because of unavoidable insecurity. It must resort to self-preservation in the face of harmful interactions among what is allowed to exist as external possibilities. The latter can be random, experimental, or intentional. Self-interest always has the potential for making impositions unfavorable to its surroundings. The self can become good if it strives to avoid insecurity and gains relative immunity by identifying with the non-self source and assuming the most positive characteristic of the source, love (at least this is how it is said to work).

 

You mean you cut out what you COULDN'T respond to. That is cowardice.

Sure but that was not the context, you CHANGED the context by purposely truncating what I wrote.

There you go again, misstating what I wrote. I NEVER mentioned any anesthetic although a general anesthetic DOES alter consciousness and a LOCAL anesthetic DOES alter nerve cell signals so that pain is not recognized.

You have no point other than to argue your own lies about what I write. I no longer wish to reply to your posts. Good Bye.

 

I guess that's one way of looking at it.

This ^ is projection, as you go on to demonstrate at the end of your post.

Thank you.

I did no such thing, obviously.

See above.

Doesn't matter. What matters is that that example, like the other one you sniveled about, exposes your assertion about consciousness and the brain/nerve connection as bullpuckey.

And thank you for making it perfectly clear that when it comes to human consciousness, you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

 

The Unconscious mind is working, alone.
The baby is thinking before birth.
Just the Unconscious minds' are working.

Freud and Jung both believed that the Unconscious mind already is alert and anticipating a mother and a father, even expecting both:

Isn't the Collective Unconscious Mind a living "book" of life as far as Modern Homo sapiens is concerned?

The Collective Unconscious is a storehouse of all the experiences of humankind transmitted to each individual.
As the repository for all past experiences, it includes even our pre-human animal ancestry.
(Assumably through the genetic processes, though unknown to Freud and Jung at the time.)

It becomes the primary base of a person's pyche, directing and influencing behavior.
It is the deepest and most inaccessable level of the psyche.
Jung believed that a person accumulates and files all of his past experiences, so does humankind, collectively.
Jung was supported by Freud in that Freud predicted our eventual discovery of what he called "Phylogenetic Memory."
Jung said, "the form of the world into which a person is born is already inborn in him, as a virtual image." (Jung, 1953, pg 18.

An example of the meaning of this was suggested in that an infant is born predisposed to perceive the mother in a certain manner.
Assuming that she behaves as we have generally considered mothers should behave, then the babies predisposition will correspond with his reality.
The form of an infant's world, "inborn within him" thus determines how he adapts and reacts to his world."

 

I have not much confidence in psychology yet, although I agree with many things they have said.
But I mean their general treatment and diagnosis are rather guesses.
Abraham Maslow, a positive psychologist, said only 1% of the people are sane.

Hence we ought work on ourselves as not sane, regardless of what sounds better to us.