***A Trip Into The Human Brain***

[Spook]

Not sure if I put this in the right place, but here it goes......

Today I am going to take you on a trip through the human brain. You may have learned about the parts of the brain in your science textbooks, but have you learned the truth behind our strange habits? Well, to start off, I am going to say that everything we do: breathing, blinking, moving--is controlled by the brain. The brain sends signals to parts of the body telling them what to do. If you decide to get up from a chair, your brain is working before you even think about it. I am going to post this diagram of the brain so you can get an idea of where all these signals come from (in attatchments).

Young Memories:
When I was about seven or eight, I remember peering through the glass of an terrarium at our three hermit crabs. I remember them crawling around in the tank of water. But here's the thing--hermit crabs don't live in water. So why did I remember them being in water? Well, to explain this--when we are younger, we remember things based on how they looked. So I remembered the hermit crab's terrarium to look like an aquarium-where fish live-with water. It didn't occur to me that it was dry inside. Until our minds are more developed, we don't process these things.

Reflexes:
When you touch a hot stove, your reflexes make you pull back your hand quickly. What are reflexes? You have reflexes to protect you from dangers. A hot stove can burn your skin. What triggers these reflexes? Reflexes are triggered when your nerves sense a stimulus. This makes your muscles contract, so your hand pulls back from the stimulus. So what does this have to do with the brain? The brain controls these reflexes! It sens a signal saying: WARNING,WARNING!

Noticing:In 7th grade (where I am now)- I started to learn greek and latin root words and words that have those roots in them. As i learned these words, I started to notice people saying them. Surely they had said them before! When our brain doesn't understand something- such as a word- it tends to block it out. So when you remember conversations, you don't remember those words being in them. Once you learn new things, and they are fresh in your mind- you start to notice them.

Senses: You've probably heard of the 5 senses- Hearing :confused:, Taste :yummy:, Touch :yeah:, Smell :rolleyes:, and sight :eek:. The brain controls all of these actions. In the attatchment, there is a diagram of a brain showing where all the signals controlling these senses come from in the brain. Enjoy!

~By Caitlin (About.A.Girl)

I have been corrected...we have "somewhere between 9 and 21 senses" which I can not name. :P

[Magus]

I thought that would be a brief in depth analysis of the brain.

Revealing on how the brain stores and retrieve information, releases biochemicals and etc. But, wysiwyg.

[Spook]

Sorry to dissappoint you. :P I just kinda noticed those things over time. ;)

[embers]

We don't have 5 senses, we have somewhere between 9 and 21.

[ShatteredWings]

We don't have 5 senses, we have somewhere between 9 and 21.

I'd be interested in hearing an elaboration on this.

[Donkey]

To the above:


http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Encountering_Nature_Through_The_Twelve_Senses.html

As is the human

But the human is also, at least in part, separate from the land.

And human nature can discern, by way of the 12 senses, aspects and nuances of the natural world through these 12 portals.

The snow sifts down into the forest, falling windless and so light as to seem almost weightless, afloat in place. A deep silence holds sway, an ocean of stillness that invites entry. And there is space enough here for any size contemplation.

In the northern, boreal realm, across this endless range of semi-homogenous evergreen forest radiating its steadfast and grounded, robust energy - across the conifer deep - here and there, an accent counters the etheric expanse with an astral focus, an animal being - raven, jay, squirrel-hunting marten, wolf, moose, or chickadee.

Tracks in the snow tell the stories. A snowshoe hare nips birch tips from a fallen tree. A luxuriously furred marten pursues a red squirrel. Unless the squirrel quickly makes it to one of its underground dens it will become the marten’s meal.

Sometime in the night the wolf came near. It came to investigate who was howling in the evening, howling like, yet unlike, another wolf (it’s own sense of language revealing that, although the sound of my howl seemed very similar to a wolf’s, there was a subtle difference). It came near enough to discern the scent of human presence, approached as near as it dared, always keeping a periphery of safety as it circuited the area of the cabin.

What curiosity was left unquenched? And in the daylight I could feel the wolf watching me from somewhere in the woods, as I went out on the frozen lake to investigate the passage of its own movement, the story told by its tracks.

Surely, from the wolf’s point of view, it experiences the most challenge of interpretation (in a sense, the wolf’s level of conceptual sense) from the human community. As is well known, the wolf can read, very intimately, the comings and goings, the various aspects of, the moose, and other inhabitants of its immediate neighborhood. But the human being becomes rich in enigma, embodies a broad range of Unknown in the sphere of the wolf’s experience.

Snow-shoeing through a forest during a snowfall can be an ideal setting to attune to the landscape. Distractions are reduced - sound is muffled and visibility is confined to a radius of a few feet (of course it goes without saying that one has to exercise care, bring a compass and be good at orienteering, or you can end up in oblivion!)
Overall, the Spirit of the boreal forest - the heart of the boreal forest landscape, like the heart of one of its trees, one senses, is golden, intricate, warm despite the climate, perhaps because of the climate, to counterpoint the cold.

In sharing this encounter with nature through the twelve senses, I will begin with the outermost, least penetrating sense and proceed to the deepest-registering sense (please note that the following presumes a basic understanding of the 12 senses. If the reader wishes to prime him/herself on this subject, use the links under “Further Resources” at the end of the article. Alternatively, information is readily available by entering an internet search via “12 senses” - and adding “Rudolf Steiner” can be helpful):

Touch.
The longer I touch the snow and ice here, the number grows this sense. Then, in turns, it is awakened by prickle of conifer needle, rasped by bark, or caressed by the soft feel of usnea moss. Whatever the sensate experience of touch, I have to admit that it defines my separation, the self’s bounds, or at least the physical body’s self-bounding. I do touch nature with this sense, but only her outermost surface, a Braille of rebuff, no entry past the outermost edge. As we continue down this list, we enter, increasingly, into the inner nature of things. But the sense of touch is the most external.

For example, when the wind gusts across my face, my sense of touch feels the impact of that gust, but my sense of temperature registers how cool or warm it is.

A manatee, with more brain space dedicated to touch than any other mammal, has a long-distance sense of touch. Whisker like hairs all over its body act as sensors, so that it can, in effect, “touch” from a distance.

Life.
After a long day of snow-shoeing my sense of life feels drained, very low in energy/chi, even despite practicing energy-enhancing Qi-gong along the way (I’m not by any means a master in the art yet).

Overall, as I undertake this trek, my sense of life is both enhanced and exhausted. My constitutional energy is put to the test, the body forces are working at their limit. However, the etheric energy of the forest is so resplendent that there is a constant influx of vitality. An interesting point to be made here is that in urban areas people have to enhance their life sense due to the lack of nature-borne vitality. In consideration of this, we can say, if asked what is truly the most valuable property in, say, New York, the answer is that Central Park has more worth that all the rest of Manhattan combined!
Migrating birds can detect and use magnetic fields of the Earth to navigate by. Is this so-called “magnetic field” actually part of the sense of life of the planet streaming forth? And are the birds, in a way, projecting their own sense of life outward to detect the Earth’s energy in this manner?

Wolves are known to stare into the eyes of their prey before opting to attack, reading in their potential prey the nature of their sense of life, their overall constitutional strength and condition of health.

Movement.
This sense of awareness of the body-in-motion enables us to know where any part of our body is even with eyes closed. It is a sense that can be refined and enhanced, as in the case of intricate choreography.

When projected outward, we can sense movement in others. One evening, as I was bent over a campfire, cooking a meal, I could sense something passing over above me. As I looked up I saw an owl flying in the trajectory I had been sensing. The owl, as we know is capable of flying quite silently. I did not hear its passage, nor could I see it in any way, until after I looked up.

Tracks of a solitary snowshoe hare enter the woods, appearing to have crossed the frozen lake - a distance of about 2 miles. What could have drawn the hare across such an long open distance? Its progress would have been little noticed as its coat matched the snow so well (here again, a developed sense of movement projected outward would have helped to sense the hare’s passage.)

Does the weasel sense the movement of mice and voles in the sub-nivean chamber beneath the snow, before it dives in?

Often have I watched a flock of shorebirds, or snowbirds, as they fly in complete unison, twisting, turning, diving, swooping as one. Here, the sense of movement has been refined and con-joined to each member of the flock, as though a single being is operating every nuance of movement. This particular example can also shed light on how the sense of ego operates within the realm of nature - more on that below.

Balance.
The human sense of balance is conveyed through inner ear structures. In animals, “otoliths” serve a similar purpose. In nature, we are often challenged to refine our sense of balance, as the terrain is often rugged and variable.

As with movement, deep appreciation of a dance presentation actually requires us to project our sense of balance, as we extend ourselves into the performance.
Within the animal kingdom, exceptional acrobatics in the balance arena include the cat and squirrel.

Smell.
A blossom permeates the air with it’s gaseous aroma. Forces of will meet, from outer (e.g., the rose’s “will”) and inner, as our own will streams out to meet it.

Desert animals can smell water vapor over a great distance. A wolf’s nose has been estimated to be from a hundred thousand to a million times more sensitive than a human’s. The bear has one of the most sensitive olfactory capacities of the animal kingdom, and is able to track through water, or read information from a scent trail several days old.

Taste.
Just as the sense of smell operates via the airy element, taste depends on the liquid element. A substance must first be partly dissolved before we can taste it. Nature has a way of producing the most flavorful tastes, for example, in fruits that evolve in natural conditions. Despite humankind’s most lengthy and deliberate attempts to improve crops in this regard, nature cannot be topped. Notice how the smallest fruits, such as a wild strawberry, have the most incredible taste. The larger agri-business causes its fruits to grow, the more the taste of its products seems to fall bland.

Salmon are famous for their ability to taste their way back up to waters from which they originated. Some fish can detect substances diluted to one part per billion. Bees have taste receptors on their jaws, forelimbs, and antennae.

Vision.
One night, as I lie in my sleeping bag, I am enchanted by a pre-sleep show courtesy of Aurora borealis. I look through the window up into the night sky, past willow and spruce to the backdrop of stars and drink in the Aurora ribbons, the northern angel flights, radiating, dancing in striations that breathe in and out in fanning coruscations.
Vision is a sense that begins to penetrate further than the foregoing senses. When our eyes perceive the blue-green color of the spruce tree, compared with the yellow-green color of the pine tree, we begin to discern something about the inner nature of these different trees.

Bees, birds, and some animals can see in the ultraviolet range. A hawk has 20/5 vision - it can see from 20 feet what most people can see from 5 feet. A falcon can see a 10 cm object from a distance of 1.5 kilometers. A buzzard can observe small rodents from an altitude of 15,000 feet.

Temperature.
We can sense outer surfaces via touch, but we actually use another sense when it comes to detecting temperature variations. As stated above, the wind is physically felt on one’s skin, but its relative cold or warmth is sensed via our sense of temperature.
Because an object is permeated by its warmth or cold, the sense of temperature reaches still deeper than vision, further into the foundation of things.

Pit vipers, and some boas, have a heat sensitive organ between their eyes and nostrils, with which they can ascertain body heat in another organism.

Hearing.
As I journey on, I can hear the rise and fall of the wind through the trees, and the crunch of my snowshoes atop the crusty snow.

Resonance, the sound quality that permeates an object, in its vibrational tone reveals much about the nature of the object. Consider candle ice clinking together. The tone the snow gives forth when walking reveals a lot about snow conditions underfoot. When sawing firewood, the sound of the particular log reveals much about the wood’s quality.

As we listen to the sounds of both things and living beings, in a certain way hearing begins to tell us something about the soul level of what we are encountering.

A pigeon can detect sounds in the infrasound range far below our own limit, as low as 0.1 Hz. Bats can hear through a range from 3,000 to 120,000 Hz (compared with the human range - 20 to 20,000 Hz.).

Language.
Language is a sense that goes beyond merely hearing something spoken. By the sense of language we are able to perceive meaning behind an expression. Language in nature is a great challenge to de-code. The language of animals and birds, the language of a landscape. Once some familiarity is attained in this area, the human element of language interpretation (that is, truly understanding another in one’s native tongue) becomes more facile.

One morning, a ptarmigan singing its dawn poem became a particular challenge to interpret. As the sun began to rise, and the ptarmigan began its song a few meters from the cabin I was waking in, I could sense an intricacy to what it was voicing. But my own sense of language, being not yet sufficiently developed, wasn’t up to interpreting its message. However, in my research I have discovered that within the human community there are individuals who are becoming increasingly adept at this level of communication.
Besides the human capacity to interpret language, within the animal kingdom there are some who can use this sense fairly effectively - e.g, the gorilla. However, on a deeper level, all animals have a Spirit of the species aspect that is as egoic as ourselves, and thus capable of fully exercising this faculty. And so, by evoking connection with, say, the Spirit of the Wolf, we can begin to enter into a viable level of communication.

Concept.
As with language, the sense of concept is an arena in which individual animals reach a limit. “One can be directed by intelligence without possessing it, and that is how if is for animals,” according to Rudolf Steiner. Here, he is referring to how the over-lighting being, the Spirit of an animal species, can utilize the higher senses - language, concept, and ego - on a par with human capacities, but not in the case of a single animal.
This is not to say animals are not intelligent - only to acknowledge a level of conceptualizing that differs from human. The Spirit of an animal is, indeed, intelligent, and has much to offer in ways that can deepen our understanding about our sojourn upon Earth.

Sense of concept can be a potent arena due to the way in which prana/chi has moved from its traditional forum (the breath) to thinking. Once we learn the ropes, through our thinking life we can enhance our energetic levels.

Nature causes me to conceptualize in particular ways. One key mode is to reflect on the spiritual ecology of aspects of nature. How does the spruce tree part of me have its being? The wolf? The squirrel? The forested part of my inner terrain? the spring? The lakeshore part? The starry dome? What does the magic of Aurora borealis evoke in me?

Ego.
Sense of ego - among ways of getting to know oneself further - that is, using one’s sense of ego upon oneself - relating to others is primary. But so, also, is spending time in nature in solitude. Nuances of one’s individuality can be explored. How do I experience solitude over a duration? What issues arise? What fears are met and what are my individual “edges” therein? For example, fears related to loneliness, or provision (as one’s food stock depletes), of the darkness (what shapes form in the dark out of fear?), or what mid-life issues still prevail?

Central to this line of questioning is - how am I in the face of prolonged silence and stillness, the great leveler of humankind and human aspiration. In what ways does this sabbatical from my life cause me to reflect on my life? What things to strengthen? Or to change? Or to come to terms with? Or seek more understanding about? How do each of the animals, plants, etc I encounter resonate with various parts of my being?

Addendum.
In reference to animals, the world is in a state of spiritual evolution, meaning that while we humans are evolving toward a fifth kingdom level of being, animals are also becoming more egoic - individualized, and more and more capable of abilities that were once attributed only to humans (or to the overall species level of the animal). Especially those animals who are spending time with humans, pets, are advancing more rapidly in this way.

All forms of life are advancing, including the other two realms of life on Earth. as plants develop more astral qualities, and the mineral kingdom becomes increasingly etheric.

Hearing and vision - nature automatically creates aesthetically beautiful forms in both aural and visual arenas. Humanity chooses to create beautiful, or not-so-beautiful forms. The more one spends in nature, the more one is immersed in aesthetic beauty.

Projecting one’s sense of motion onto the snowflakes, and there is a feeling of softly sifting down through one’s being.

Projecting to high mountain peaks, there is a feeling of excarnation, or moving up out of one’s body, in a sense.

Similarly, on the West Coast, where the energy is experienced as diffusive - all the rain and sea and growth and abundance of plant life, rainforest exuberance, calls for an extra degree of focusing to counteract the diffusion.

The 12 senses referred to here pertain primarily to the physical aspect of humanity. Other senses come into play as we enter into our spiritual nature, including the human astral body. Steiner refers to some of these metaphysical senses as imagination, inspiration and intuition. Earth Vision proposes to delve into this subject, along with a more extensive examination of the 12 senses in relation to the natural world - a book will likely result in the foreseeable future. If you would like to contribute to this project, please contact author Josef Graf through the email on the EV site.

[Spook]

Very interesting...and long. Thx for posting anyhow. :D

[Donkey]

There's always more than it seems there is on the surface, Caitlin. :) Your post was very interesting to read but what is really interesting is looking further into why and how you experience and feel specific things. I particularly like to delve into the logics or lack thereof of human consciousness. How everything in the world and my perception can be so universal, yet is individually assigned to my consciousness. Are there other consciousnesses? In the space and physical world of perception, of course, we are all biological beings and the consciousness surely must just be chemicals. In a spiritual world, not quite - what we see is only as we perceive it, I could be the only existing consciousness, with everything else manifested. Or there could be infinite amounts of consciousness, but all with the same recipient of perception in essence. All just defined to a particular life that exists with reason.

A common misconception with referring to infinity and how anything could exist is that people begin to think "wait, there's a world somewhere out there with pink aliens and where darkness is light?" I believe there are infinite possibilities and dimensions in existence, but simply that they all must exist with reason. This is parallel to the fact that infinity only exists purely due to nothing existing. Infinity is contained in nothing, and without nothing, infinity cannot exist. We are living in a world which is equal both to 0 and 1.

Some rather deep philosophy there - you might want to hold me back a little. As for the human mind, I believe very strongly that consciousness and the ability to perceive, interpret and experience using something so pure and simple yet vastly complex as consciousness is not just the mix of neuroscience and chemicals in a physical world. We are not just brains. We are not just chemicals. We are spiritual.

Finally,

We are not human beings on a spiritual journey, we are spiritual beings on a human journey

[Iceman]

Shit Jon, I started reading then I scrolled down. I stopped.

[Donkey]

Shit Jon, I started reading then I scrolled down. I stopped.
My puberty guide is longer... and it isn't a paste. :P

[Iceman]

My puberty guide is longer... and it isn't a paste. :P

Never read it, never plan to either, especially now. I would hate to be your English teacher.

[Sage]

The amount of wishy-washing pseudo-scientific bullshit in this thread is offensive. Shame on you for deluding these little kids, Jon. There is no evidence that we are anything other than brains and chemicals regardless of how many large words you use. Also, your sources seem a lot more credible when they don't

All forms of life are advancing, including the other two realms of life on Earth. as plants develop more astral qualities, and the mineral kingdom becomes increasingly etheric.

refer to rocks as magical life forms. Unbelievable.

[Donkey]

The amount of wishy-washing pseudo-scientific bullshit in this thread is offensive. Shame on you for deluding these little kids, Jon. There is no evidence that we are anything other than brains and chemicals regardless of how many large words you use. Also, your sources seem a lot more credible when they don't

I ain't deluding no shittin' niggaz. The fact is all of our science is extracted from the physical world, which I believe to be nothing more than a facade. The time when you get past that facade, realise there is so much more and break the boundaries is the time that your soul and spirit becomes entwined with nature and all that is good. The time that you are able to simply relax and enjoy your consciousness, and not be bound by walls. What I wrote isn't just the result of reading a few stoner forums, it's the results of a lot of meditation, a lot of consideration and deeper thoughts and philosophies than I can quite put into words. So I tend to only write conclusions, however one day I will post my ideas in more depth.

There is no evidence... hardy, hardy har. There is no evidence that a sheet of paper or quote from someone with a fancy name constitutes as evidence, or anything remotely factual. In fact all you're really doing is not trusting your own judgement, not letting yourself think and not letting me share my views.

As for the "source" (it was by no means intended as such, but rather a very interesting article written by a very interesting person), this was simply posted only to outline my views and discuss human senses and that I believe there to be more than 5. I feel it rounds this up pretty well, and there's a lovely bit of literature in there.

[ShaneK]

How interesting man is with our isometric bodies and our glass-jaw minds

[Sage]

The fact is all of our science is extracted from the physical world, which I believe to be nothing more than a facade.

This is where I stop taking you seriously. Until you can prove this premise, any and all points you're making that are dependent on that premise are invalid.

[Donkey]

Did you not read my post correctly? I quite clearly said "I believe." Whether or not you agree with me, I don't mind. I am simply using this thread as a platform to share my ideas, rather than debate them. So no, any points I'm making aren't invalid. Whether you care for "proof" (such a thing does not exist) or not. I will post up why I think what in my diary at some point. I won't have any rocks or pieces of paper to show for it though.

As for your -reputation... never have I had -rep for being disagreed with, that's an interesting one. I would say I'd give some back whenever I disagree with one of your posts, but actually I won't. I will say though, instead of making snappy remarks you should actually discuss ideas a little more. It won't help your ego, but it'll be a hell of a lot more interesting for everyone else.

If your entire argument is founded on reading stoner forums, "meditating," and believing in spirits and souls, you're a poor debater and I fail to see any substance in anything you're saying. If you've no factual basis, stay out of debates. ~Sage

None of my post was founded on reading stoner forums, I made that quite clear when I said "What I wrote isn't just the result of reading a few stoner forums," if you read it correctly. I don't read stoner forums, for that matter. I do meditate though, and I don't believe in spirits and souls as the white cloak in the corridor, I believe in them as every human does - whether they know it or not. Human consciousness is only biology; objects, chemicals and uselessness. It is so useless in fact, that if all human beings accepted that all we were was physical mass, and understood that to a deep level, everyone would be suicidal and find absolutely no reason. If we savor consciousness, enjoy it and find something deeper in it (spirituality, souls or otherwise) we will enjoy our consciousness much more. And given the experiences I've had, the meditation I've done and the deepest thoughts and ideology I've considered, I believe there is more to humanity than physical mass.

Calling me a poor debater is interesting because as mentioned above, and even now, I've never set out to debate anyone. I only used the thread as a platform to share ideas, which is actually what I'm still doing. I have no interest particularly in debating someone who very much agrees with the physical world in science, and does not look further. Just like science never proves religion wrong, science cannot ever provide any evidence/proof for spirituality or telling us exactly what consciousness is (sure, we know the neuroscience, but we don't know everything about consciousness, what an individual human existence is, etc.)

I have no factual basis. Absolutely none. And if you don't agree with me, there's probably not a lot of substance in what I'm saying. So what? There are no rules to sharing ideas, or debating really.


Hey look, you've hardly proven a point. How peculiar - Murdoc

As before really, I never set out to prove anything so I don't quite understand the relevance of this comment. Alas, VT, you may disagree with me but being harmonious is perhaps the best resolution to this situation. All I'll say is, try meditating and see how it goes. You might delve deeper into your mind than you ever have before. I'll also say that I also used to be a massive skeptic, before I began just sitting, calm, focused and collective with maybe some steel pans in the background. Distracted by nothing but the enormous depth of my imagination and being engulfed by thoughts, visions and finally a true consideration of reality.

Give this a read: http://www.darkseptemberrain.com/ideas/religionvssci.htm

Spiritualists aren't all nut jobs living in wooden houses, somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Remember that some scientists are also spiritualists (http://www.freshbrainz.com/2007/09/alfred-russel-wallace-scientist-and.html) (try this (http://nextlevelshit.net/?p=606) one too). I still got A*s on my science exams, and I'm quite happy with the ideas. I agree with most, I just accept them to be in the physical world. I don't believe that consciousness is a part of the physical dimension at all. The main bit I disagree with is the big bang.

I'm not religious - I never have been, and generally don't agree with the idea of a higher being. Like anything else though, I won't put it down. I won't say it's wrong just because I can't imagine it or disagree with it. I might be going nuts and be waffling absolute shit, but this is what in my mind, and given everything I've done so far, I feel is most likely. Good morning, and I must leave for school now.

[Sage]

Did you not read my post correctly? I quite clearly said "I believe." Whether or not you agree with me, I don't mind. I am simply using this thread as a platform to share my ideas, rather than debate them.
Sharing an idea is one thing, but if the only thing you can say when they're criticized is that you don't care what others think, then we're not having a discussion. "Believe" whatever you like about your brain: Maybe I believe my brain is actually a computer chip in some exterior universe that is ruled by evil magistrate duck lords. Alas, this can't be proven, and so it's useless.

So no, any points I'm making aren't invalid.
Just because you don't care that they are invalid does not make them invalid.

Whether you care for "proof" (such a thing does not exist)
To a practical degree, yes, proof does exist.

As for your -reputation...
If you have a problem with that, take it up with a staff member. Otherwise, deal with it. Shifting the focus of this discussion to my criticism speaks poorly of your character, but if you want to go down that route, let me cut through the rubbish and get to the heart of the matter:

I only used the thread as a platform to share ideas, which is actually what I'm still doing.
Good for you. If you're going to put your ideas out in a public forum, they're going to be criticized. You can either defend them in debate, or simply sit back in your pseudo-smug throne and proclaim ideological pacifism and look like an idiot. Opinions are like testicles, Jon: It doesn't matter what yours look like if they're kicked hard enough.

Just like science never proves religion wrong,
In my four years on this forum, I've tediously explained the concept of 'burden of evidence' over and over to hordes upon hordes of wishy-washy idiots that use this argument. That's not how things work. Science isn't responsible to prove religion wrong: Religion is responsible to prove itself right.

science cannot ever provide any evidence/proof for spirituality
You're right. It can't provide evidence for spirituality because there isn't any.

or telling us exactly what consciousness is (sure, we know the neuroscience,
http://www.gogaminggiant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/facepalm.jpg

but we don't know everything about consciousness,
We don't know everything about a lot of things: That's what research is for. And no, sitting down comfortably and thinking happy thoughts doesn't count as research.

I have no factual basis. Absolutely none.
You don't say.

So what? There are no rules to sharing ideas, or debating really.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Everyone is welcome to share an idea, but again I stress, if you can't defend or prove it, you're just making an ass of yourself.

Your entire argument requires souls and spirits to exist. If you can't prove they exist and properly define them, everything you're arguing is nothing more than wishful thinking. You may not like debates, but this is a debate forum. If everyone is just going to share their ideas and never have them criticized or defended, there is no discussion or exchange of ideas. Some people may just be content to believe in whatever makes them feel good: Alas, this outlook is useless. If you're going to make no effort to defend your points, then I am not going to make any further effort to argue with a fourteen year old who insists he has the nature of reality figured out by sitting down and closing his eyes.

Have a nice day.

[Magus]

Some crazy poetic spiritual naturalism going on in this thread.

And I don't have my pc, now. Writing via the phone is quite cumbersome.

[Iceman]

Or Jon could use ad Ignorantiam. Meaning his argument is true, because it has not been proven false.
Much like religious people use to prove that God is real, because they have no actual proof, and it can't be proven false.

But continue, like I was never here.

[Sage]

Or Jon could use ad Ignorantiam. Meaning his argument is true, because it has not been proven false.
Much like religious people use to prove that God is real, because they have no actual proof, and it can't be proven false.

But continue, like I was never here.

That's what I was getting at when I said I don't feel like explaining the concept of burden of evidence for the umpteenth time.

[Spook]

I am not extremely stupid. :P I know not to take what jon said as facts...or a learning resource...and I definately didn't expect this many comments...Um the whole brain thing I did was just a crappy essay. xD

**I have the reading lever of a 22 year old so I pretty much understood it :)

***And I think Donkey's right...I also wrote this to make a thread for ideas. I was merely saying I enjoyed hearing Donkey's thoughts...no need to critisize them thank you. :D

[Spook]

[QUOTE=Donkey;1217795]I ain't deluding no shittin' niggaz.

O.o You don't use that...to describe children. For one, it's offensive. Secondly, it is offenive to black people. So...you aren't using it correctly.

[embers]

I'd be interested in hearing an elaboration on this.

I never meant for it to go down the dreamy bullshit route Donkey took it down to. Rather, I meant something like this (http://www.wisegeek.com/how-many-human-senses-are-there.htm). I won't quote from Wikipedia for the sake of there being very few citations on that particular article.

I ain't deluding no shittin' niggaz.

O.o You don't use that...to describe children. For one, it's offensive. Secondly, it is offenive to black people. So...you aren't using it correctly.

inb4 shitstorm of 'you're too sensitive'

[Sogeking]

I ain't deluding no shittin' niggaz.

O.o You don't use that...to describe children. For one, it's offensive. Secondly, it is offenive to black people. So...you aren't using it correctly.

Someone needs to read this (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=92035).

[Donkey]

Sharing an idea is one thing, but if the only thing you can say when they're criticized is that you don't care what others think, then we're not having a discussion. "Believe" whatever you like about your brain: Maybe I believe my brain is actually a computer chip in some exterior universe that is ruled by evil magistrate duck lords. Alas, this can't be proven, and so it's useless.

Oh, it's that lovely time in this forum where we all split up each others' posts. Super. The reason why I wasn't particularly bothered by what you thought, and expressed that, is because I have no interest in making it a debate. And when you came to call my points invalid, it's not a discussion either. I believe that my brain exists and is something of physical biological mass, sure. Happily. When talking about my consciousness, I didn't even mention my brain. So herpaderp.


Just because you don't care that they are invalid does not make them invalid.
That made no sense. Do you mean it does not make them valid? I don't really understand what you're getting at.


To a practical degree, yes, proof does exist.
Proof is absolutely certain irrefutable evidence that points to a conclusion of something that is definitely true. Something that I don't agree ever exists, humans can believe. They can't know.


If you have a problem with that, take it up with a staff member. Otherwise, deal with it. Shifting the focus of this discussion to my criticism speaks poorly of your character, but if you want to go down that route, let me cut through the rubbish and get to the heart of the matter:
How does it speak poorly of my character? It's just more shit you've thrown at me for no good reason that I felt like addressing. This isn't a discussion, by the way, as you usually with any kind of conversation it just has turned into someone else defending themselves form you making illogical attacks.


Good for you. If you're going to put your ideas out in a public forum, they're going to be criticized. You can either defend them in debate, or simply sit back in your pseudo-smug throne and proclaim ideological pacifism and look like an idiot. Opinions are like testicles, Jon: It doesn't matter what yours look like if they're kicked hard enough.
I'm happy for criticism of my ideas, when that becomes criticism of me I'm not so happy. When my ideas are generalised and not constructively criticised at all, then I get pissy. As for proclaiming pacifist ideology, I do that to a degree - I believe humans should be harmonious and happy with one another, not be violent. I never said that was going to work, or that it will.


In my four years on this forum, I've tediously explained the concept of 'burden of evidence' over and over to hordes upon hordes of wishy-washy idiots that use this argument. That's not how things work. Science isn't responsible to prove religion wrong: Religion is responsible to prove itself right.
If you want me to take this shit seriously, and actually discuss my beliefs which aren't completely unfounded with you then don't call me an idiot and don't be so demeaning. It's particularly irritating when I've been restraining myself through all this, oh well. I know the burden of evidence concept, thanks. And if I was actually particularly bothered about persuading someone or discussing it in a very detailed way, I'd go more in depth. Instead I summarised - fortunately though I'm not standing up in court, having to persuade anyone or doing anything much other than defend myself. If you find "explaining" this stuff to idiots like me so tedious, please do stop.


You're right. It can't provide evidence for spirituality because there isn't any.
Once again, science cannot provide evidence for spirituality because science works in the physical world, whereas spirituality does not.


image (http://www.gogaminggiant.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/facepalm.jpg)
I'm enjoying this discussion you speak of. Consciousness is only believed to be the collective result of various parts of the brain working (according to Athene's Theory of Everything I think,) there is no particularly convincing evidence for that though. Have a look.


We don't know everything about a lot of things: That's what research is for. And no, sitting down comfortably and thinking happy thoughts doesn't count as research.
Once again... this'll begin to sound like preaching. Physical world, man.


You don't say.
...


Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Everyone is welcome to share an idea, but again I stress, if you can't defend or prove it, you're just making an ass of yourself.
You need to insert more "I think," "I believe" and "in my opinion"s into your posts. I think it makes you look like a bit of an ass when you try to present your views on debating as fact.

Your entire argument requires souls and spirits to exist. If you can't prove they exist and properly define them, everything you're arguing is nothing more than wishful thinking. You may not like debates, but this is a debate forum. If everyone is just going to share their ideas and never have them criticized or defended, there is no discussion or exchange of ideas. Some people may just be content to believe in whatever makes them feel good: Alas, this outlook is useless. If you're going to make no effort to defend your points, then I am not going to make any further effort to argue with a fourteen year old who insists he has the nature of reality figured out by sitting down and closing his eyes.
The first two sentences are irrelevant as I was not making an argument. And actually I enjoy debates, just about the right things with the right people. People that won't attack me personally mainly, I suppose. This just isn't a debate forum, do read the forum description - "A place to debate and discuss your ideas." Once again, I'm happy to discuss my ideas and have them constructively criticised. That isn't what I believe in, I don't just believe in this because it makes me feel good. In fact it links to a lot of stuff that makes me feel like shit, but I still don't believe that outlook is useless - being content with life is all that matters.

If you're not going to make any effort to discuss this properly, then I'll just cite your age and patronise you. Meditation is not just sitting down and closing your eyes, maybe you should try it.

I've already explained I don't believe in souls and spirits in the sense you're thinking of. I'm not some fuck who believes in psychics, Ouija boards and ghosts. I just believe that consciousness is not derived only from tissues, chemicals and biology. I'm not providing any reasoning for why, because I don't know it. That's all I've been trying to say. If I believed that consciousness was only my brain working, I'd probably have similar viewpoints to you. I think for that reason I'm done with this. If you or anyone else wants to ever discuss it properly, drop me a PM.

I never meant for it to go down the dreamy bullshit route Donkey took it down to.'
We moved on from the senses thing. I didn't take what you said anywhere, I just developed the general conversation.

O.o You don't use that...to describe children. For one, it's offensive. Secondly, it is offenive to black people. So...you aren't using it correctly.
I won't even bother arguing with you, I've had enough for today. Sorry if you're offended, but you shouldn't be.

Or Jon could use ad Ignorantiam. Meaning his argument is true, because it has not been proven false.
Much like religious people use to prove that God is real, because they have no actual proof, and it can't be proven false..
I did briefly reference to that, but it was in response to something. I wouldn't use ad ignorantiam as a main argument point.

[Spook]

Sheesh. My simple blog about a brain turned into a huge debate. :D Well thank you everyone for commenting, and um...I read the thing about how I should leave the internet because I am a sensitive child. Thanks a lot, Sogeking. xD