"Consciousness is incorporeal" seems far too presumptuous unless you're of the wholly unconvincing and unsubstantiated opinion that consciousness consists of an "ectoplasmic"-like quality that can pass through walls while maintaining the appearance of a body, or in this case, skulls. More mysteriously, however, is the utter lack of convincing evidence for such a substance despite the enthusiasm of paranormal researchers, and quite astonishing to say the least, the wealth of experiments that suggest a strong correlation between altered physical states and experiences in consciousness. It seems that consciousness is very much corporeal, though the first-person perspective contains within it private sensations and illusory images.

(September 28, 2014 at 2:59 pm)Surgenator Wrote:

(September 28, 2014 at 2:01 am)psychoslice Wrote: Yes that maybe so, but still experience is the ultimate, you just cannot beat it.

No. Evidence is ultimate not experience. You can have plenty of experiences that give you false knowledge or interpretation of reality. Evidence doesn't have this weakness. That is why it is the ultimate.

Yes you can read as much evidence about whatever as long as you want, but you will never know the truth of the matter until you have experienced it for yourself.

(September 28, 2014 at 8:59 pm)psychoslice Wrote: Yes you can read as much evidence about whatever as long as you want, but you will never know the truth of the matter until you have experienced it for yourself.

Do you not understand what evidence is? Evidence is "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid" (from google). Evidence tells me the "truth of the matter". An experience can only do that when it is considered as evidence, and expericences are not always evidence. For example, people praying to God and hearing responces in their heads is an experience. It is not evidence of a God talking back to them.

So if I want to know truth, I need evidence.

---

(September 28, 2014 at 3:22 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: I don't know what you mean really. Experiences are necessary for any conceptual statement, any citation of evidence, literally everything that may be considered meaningul.

Yes, experiences are a starting point. However, you can gain the knowledge from other peoples experiences and bypass the original work required to get that knowledge. Evidence is the final word has the final word on whether a proposition is true or not. Experiences and knowledge don't necessarily have that ability. This is what I mean that evidence is the ultimate arbitrator of what is true.

(September 28, 2014 at 10:00 pm)Surgenator Wrote:

(September 28, 2014 at 8:59 pm)psychoslice Wrote: Yes you can read as much evidence about whatever as long as you want, but you will never know the truth of the matter until you have experienced it for yourself.

Do you not understand what evidence is? Evidence is "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid" (from google). Evidence tells me the "truth of the matter". An experience can only do that when it is considered as evidence, and expericences are not always evidence. For example, people praying to God and hearing responces in their heads is an experience. It is not evidence of a God talking back to them.

So if I want to know truth, I need evidence.

My own experience in consciousness was my own evidence, I don't need anyone else's opinion. I have known others who have had the same experience, and if its all in our minds, then so what, that is where the whole idea of life manifests, its all in our mind.

Because the experience was in my own being and then experienced through my mind, I cannot make an argument out of it. Most people don't fully understand the equation E=Mc2, but Einstein did, he experience the equation within himself, in his mind, and then he had to try and put that into an equation. We can read as much as we like about this equation, but if its not fully realized within we will never truly understand it, we would just be parroting what Einstein truly understood.

(September 28, 2014 at 10:17 pm)psychoslice Wrote: My own experience in consciousness was my own evidence, I don't need anyone else's opinion. I have known others who have had the same experience, and if its all in our minds, then so what, that is where the whole idea of life manifests, its all in our mind.

How do you know your experiences are a correct representation of reality? From your experiences alone, you don't. And a group of experiences still doesn't prove it.

Quote:Because the experience was in my own being and then experienced through my mind, I cannot make an argument out of it. Most people don't fully understand the equation E=Mc2, but Einstein did, he experience the equation within himself, in his mind, and then he had to try and put that into an equation. We can read as much as we like about this equation, but if its not fully realized within we will never truly understand it, we would just be parroting what Einstein truly understood.

How do you know noone else understood or understands E=mc^2 as well or even better than Einstein? You don't, and you can't just claim it to be so. Isn't the proof that someone understands E=mc^2 is when they can explain it to others or use the equations to produce something that works?

(September 28, 2014 at 10:45 pm)Surgenator Wrote:

(September 28, 2014 at 10:17 pm)psychoslice Wrote: My own experience in consciousness was my own evidence, I don't need anyone else's opinion. I have known others who have had the same experience, and if its all in our minds, then so what, that is where the whole idea of life manifests, its all in our mind.

How do you know your experiences are a correct representation of reality? From your experiences alone, you don't. And a group of experiences still doesn't prove it.

Quote:Because the experience was in my own being and then experienced through my mind, I cannot make an argument out of it. Most people don't fully understand the equation E=Mc2, but Einstein did, he experience the equation within himself, in his mind, and then he had to try and put that into an equation. We can read as much as we like about this equation, but if its not fully realized within we will never truly understand it, we would just be parroting what Einstein truly understood.

How do you know noone else understood or understands E=mc^2 as well or even better than Einstein? You don't, and you can't just claim it to be so. Isn't the proof that someone understands E=mc^2 is when they can explain it to others or use the equations to produce something that works?

No, they can refine their knowledge of the equation, they can study it for a life time, but they will never truly know what it is, and this goes for just about everything we know as humans.

(September 28, 2014 at 11:06 pm)psychoslice Wrote: No, they can refine their knowledge of the equation, they can study it for a life time, but they will never truly know what it is, and this goes for just about everything we know as humans.

How do you know this?

(September 28, 2014 at 11:14 pm)Surgenator Wrote:

(September 28, 2014 at 11:06 pm)psychoslice Wrote: No, they can refine their knowledge of the equation, they can study it for a life time, but they will never truly know what it is, and this goes for just about everything we know as humans.

How do you know this?

Because everything we believe we know is because of our senses, we as humans are equipped with senses that we feel the world with, so what we believe to be true, is only true in the level that our senses allow us. But the level that we believe we know all about, is no more than an illusion, and we all live in that illusion because we all have the same senses. We all agree on what a colour is, what a sound is and on and on, but again its only one small level. As it is said, "if a tree falls and there is no one there, does it make a sound ?", well there is vibration, but no sound, there needs to be a hearing apparatus to convert the vibration into what we call sound, and this goes for everything else.

(September 28, 2014 at 11:36 pm)psychoslice Wrote: Because everything we believe we know is because of our senses, we as humans are equipped with senses that we feel the world with, so what we believe to be true, is only true in the level that our senses allow us. But the level that we believe we know all about, is no more than an illusion, and we all live in that illusion because we all have the same senses. We all agree on what a colour is, what a sound is and on and on, but again its only one small level. As it is said, "if a tree falls and there is no one there, does it make a sound ?", well there is vibration, but no sound, there needs to be a hearing apparatus to convert the vibration into what we call sound, and this goes for everything else.

Thats an answer to a question I didn't asked. I asked, how do you know that someone cannot completely comprehend someone else idea?

Also, your answer is wrong. Not everything is obtained from our senses. For example, mathematical truths are not experienced through our senses. Mathematical truths are arrived through deduction.

(September 29, 2014 at 12:01 am)Surgenator Wrote:

(September 28, 2014 at 11:36 pm)psychoslice Wrote: Because everything we believe we know is because of our senses, we as humans are equipped with senses that we feel the world with, so what we believe to be true, is only true in the level that our senses allow us. But the level that we believe we know all about, is no more than an illusion, and we all live in that illusion because we all have the same senses. We all agree on what a colour is, what a sound is and on and on, but again its only one small level. As it is said, "if a tree falls and there is no one there, does it make a sound ?", well there is vibration, but no sound, there needs to be a hearing apparatus to convert the vibration into what we call sound, and this goes for everything else.

Thats an answer to a question I didn't asked. I asked, how do you know that someone cannot completely comprehend someone else idea?

Also, your answer is wrong. Not everything is obtained from our senses. For example, mathematical truths are not experienced through our senses. Mathematical truths are arrived through deduction.

Its doesn't matter, we still have to have our senses to even understand it, it all works well in our so called life, other levels of life it probably means nothing.

We can know what others believe, but we will never fully know, your mind is yours, not mine. so we can never truly know what the other thinks because we can only know our own mind, and in truth we don't even truly know that. Who is the one knowing, where is he, if you say it me, then who are you. You see we are just an organism that has been conditioned and programmed, and nothing else. So are we the conditioning and programming, you see there is no one, there's a body here typing away, but its no me.