What is logic?

[Lucanus]

Gee Luc I am so so so excited that you will become a great great expert in the brain activity.
Please Luc do me a favor.  
Ask your professor who decide to start the action.
The I the mind or the brain and if there is any difference between the I the mind and the brain.
I have been asking so many people  and no one could tell me for sure.
I am sure that your professor will know the answer.  
Please help LR to understand.  

1) I asked you a question. This is not an answer to it.

2) The point is exactly that we still do not know for sure how exactly consciousness works. From what we know, we can only infer that it is linked to very complex functions of the brain. There are thousands of people around the world that have been working their asses off for their entire lives trying to gain - inch by inch - a little more understanding about these incredibly complex issues. And there is plenty of peer-reviewed literature (not to mention entire textbooks) to prove that - slowly but surely- we are getting there. And it really does piss me off when you just throw your opinion around like it's absolute fact - like this:

The pineal gland is the seat of the consciousness and when the consciousness is 100% pure you are God.

All you do, time and time again, is that you never even consider the fact that the scientific community just hasn't gotten there yet, because it's a very complicated topic that requires a great deal of effort to get into, and it takes a lot of time to produce and validate results because of the huge number of variables involved. On the other hand, it seems like you just take a shit on all of these people's efforts and just say "Yeah it's spiritual and magic I'm 100% sure because permanent happiness or whatever".

Where I'm from, we have a saying that goes: "Nessuno nasce imparato" ("Nobody is born learned" - even though in Italian it is grammatically incorrect lol). Please do take it to heart. You'll find it will improve the quality of conversation with you a great deal.

[Little Rik]

Gee Luc I am so so so excited that you will become a great great expert in the brain activity.
Please Luc do me a favor.  
Ask your professor who decide to start the action.
The I the mind or the brain and if there is any difference between the I the mind and the brain.
I have been asking so many people  and no one could tell me for sure.
I am sure that your professor will know the answer.  
Please help LR to understand.  

1) I asked you a question. This is not an answer to it.

2) The point is exactly that we still do not know for sure how exactly consciousness works. From what we know, we can only infer that it is linked to very complex functions of the brain. There are thousands of people around the world that have been working their asses off for their entire lives trying to gain - inch by inch - a little more understanding about these incredibly complex issues. And there is plenty of peer-reviewed literature (not to mention entire textbooks) to prove that - slowly but surely- we are getting there. And it really does piss me off when you just throw your opinion around like it's absolute fact - like this:

The pineal gland is the seat of the consciousness and when the consciousness is 100% pure you are God.

All you do, time and time again, is that you never even consider the fact that the scientific community just hasn't gotten there yet, because it's a very complicated topic that requires a great deal of effort to get into, and it takes a lot of time to produce and validate results because of the huge number of variables involved. On the other hand, it seems like you just take a shit on all of these people's efforts and just say "Yeah it's spiritual and magic I'm 100% sure because permanent happiness or whatever".

Where I'm from, we have a saying that goes: "Nessuno nasce imparato" ("Nobody is born learned" - even though in Italian it is grammatically incorrect lol). Please do take it to heart. You'll find it will improve the quality of conversation with you a great deal.

Easy answer to your question.  

The very reason why the scientific community has yet to give an answer to the question that you just put forward is because these people think that by studying the mind and the brain they can come up with the answer.
Unfortunately these folks never realized that the answer lie in the PRACTICE not in theories.

As far as these folks will keep on engaging in theories and not in practice they will never ever come up with understanding how the system works.
Yoga knew the answer 7000 years ago because yoga is 1 or 2% theory and 98-99% practice.

Unfortunately you and your professor will have to bang your heads hundreds or thousand of times  before you will do the right thing and get out the corral of dogmas in which you guys are.

[Lucanus]

Easy answer to your question.  

The very reason why the scientific community has yet to give an answer to the question that you just put forward is because these people think that by studying the mind and the brain they can come up with the answer.
Unfortunately these folks never realized that the answer lie in the PRACTICE not in theories.

As far as these folks will keep on engaging in theories and not in practice they will never ever come up with understanding how the system works.
Yoga knew the answer 7000 years ago because yoga is 1 or 2% theory and 98-99% practice.

Unfortunately you and your professor will have to bang your heads hundreds or thousand of times  before you will do the right thing and get out the corral of dogmas in which you guys are.

Wow. Wow.

Do you honestly think that science gets done "only in theory"? Do you honestly have even the faintest idea of how scientists work? Do you know how experiments are designed? Do you know what a painstaking effort it is to validate the data that you get from observations? Do you know how hard it is for a study to pass peer review and get published by reputable sources?

A scientist's job is not to spew theories disconnected from reality. Scientists observe systems and with the data they get they make a model of how the system works. The model then gets tested again and again to corroborate and correct it. It's not theory, it's practice. WAY more practice than you think.

You obviously have grown up with the myth of the arrogant, know-it-all, aloof scientist, and it really does show in the way you approach scientific subjects.

[Little Rik]

Easy answer to your question.  

The very reason why the scientific community has yet to give an answer to the question that you just put forward is because these people think that by studying the mind and the brain they can come up with the answer.
Unfortunately these folks never realized that the answer lie in the PRACTICE not in theories.

As far as these folks will keep on engaging in theories and not in practice they will never ever come up with understanding how the system works.
Yoga knew the answer 7000 years ago because yoga is 1 or 2% theory and 98-99% practice.

Unfortunately you and your professor will have to bang your heads hundreds or thousand of times  before you will do the right thing and get out the corral of dogmas in which you guys are.

Wow. Wow.

Do you honestly think that science gets done "only in theory"? Do you honestly have even the faintest idea of how scientists work? Do you know how experiments are designed? Do you know what a painstaking effort it is to validate the data that you get from observations? Do you know how hard it is for a study to pass peer review and get published by reputable sources?

A scientist's job is not to spew theories disconnected from reality. Scientists observe systems and with the data they get they make a model of how the system works. The model then gets tested again and again to corroborate and correct it. It's not theory, it's practice. WAY more practice than you think.

You obviously have grown up with the myth of the arrogant, know-it-all, aloof scientist, and it really does show in the way you approach scientific subjects.

Wrong again Luc.
Nothing to do with arrogant and all to do with practice.
Practice lead to the realization whether the theory is correct or not.
What you think is practice is not.
Consciousness is an abstract entity remember that Luc.
Scientists do not understand yet that to understand the abstract you got to use an abstract tool not a physical one and this is the very point that scientists still have to understand that is why they are not getting anywhere.  

[emjay]

See, I agree with your logic here but I see no need to call it 'spirituality' just psychology. Realising that everything is impermanent/transient, and therefore chasing it is ultimately pointless and will lead to inevitable loss (ie suffering), leads to one logical conclusion that attachment (to these impermanent things) is the cause of suffering, and therefore the solution that eliminating attachment, eliminates suffering. I just see that as a psychological theory that makes logical sense, but nowhere does it need to be called 'spiritual' for it to be put into practice in life. All it needs is mindfulness and awareness. So if I were to go into it fully, I don't ultimately see what difference would be between you and me... both striving for non-attachment but with you believing in an afterlife/reincarnation and me not. If that full state of non-attachment was reached, then if true, eternal life would just be a continuation of the state we had reached... which, being non-attachment, would be just a state of peace without want. So what I'm saying is if we got that far, there's not much difference between ceasing to exist and living on in a perpetual state of not giving a fuck about anything So basically ultimately I don't see what the notion of God offers to the equation or how it would make any practical difference even if it were true.

Your analysis badly miss something.
Psychology can only reach a certain point.
The mind is like an iceberg.
We can only see the above part.
If we want to see the part below the water we have to go under the water.
The mind is not all the same.
There is the conscious mind and the unconscious mind.
To understand the conscious mind is not a big deal but to see the unconscious mind it is.
Psychology is not the best tool to see below.
All psychology can do is to see the above part and guess what lie under in the unconscious mind
but guessing is not good enough that is why I wouldn't take for granted what psychology say.

To know what lie under in the unconscious mind a person must undertake a lot of hard work.
Is not so simple.
It takes practice and a lot of it.
Psychology doesn't undertake practice so there is no way that psychology will ever be able to understand the mind in full and here I mean the conscious and the unconscious mind.  

Ultimately I don't disagree with how you view the mind. I agree with your analogy of the conscious mind being the proverbial tip of the iceberg, which does not, normally, have access to what's below the water.

The difference though I guess is I don't see quite such a strong boundary line between conscious and subconscious... so I'd use a slightly different analogy. It's not a perfect analogy but I think it's good enough to make my point. I'd liken normal conscious awareness to a raging storm, where the wind is conscious attention, and the waves are things on which you can focus your attention. In everyday life you deal with these waves as they come at you, focusing your attention where needed (i.e. in this analogy blowing a wind), and that keeps the storm raging. But meditation deprives the waves of wind, and thus allows the storm to start to calm. The bigger waves disperse leaving smaller and subtler waves below them, which are now available to focus attention on. Deprive them of wind and they disperse, leaving even smaller waves. Deprive them of wind and there may only be ripples left. So at the end, according to this analogy, the perfect state... the state of an arahant... would be no waves at all, just a perfectly clear and still lake, as if it was ice.

That's roughly how I view meditation and what is going on during it. But I still don't call it spiritual, only psychological. But then, I use the word psychological to refer to anything of the mind, so it may or may not be the case that we are referring to the same things, just using different terminology.

All that said, I'm not that accomplished in meditation... the longest I've done is about an hour and I've never reached states like that. But I freely admit I'm not fully committed to Buddhism (I know you're not a Buddhist... but there are similarities) and therefore that, as you say, I'm only scratching the surface of what's possible with my level of involvement, but that's enough for me; as a perspective on life, even 'Buddhism-lite' has improved my life hundred-fold, and I wouldn't trade it for anything, so I'm happy with where I am, and all this recent discussion of it has sparked my interest again because I'd let it slip a bit.

But you do sound like you are an accomplished meditator? If you don't mind me asking, how long do you do it for and how frequently? And what sorts of experiences have you had in meditation?

[Lucanus]

Wrong again Luc.
Nothing to do with arrogant and all to do with practice.
Practice lead to the realization whether the theory is correct or not.
What you think is practice is not.
Consciousness is an abstract entity remember that Luc.
Scientists do not understand yet that to understand the abstract you got to use an abstract tool not a physical one and this is the very point that scientists still have to understand that is why they are not getting anywhere.  

I'm sorry but this is simply not true. If consciousness is such an abstract entity, how come damage to the brain can result in severely altered states of consciousness?
I mean look at this:

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage (it's in Italian for your convenience)

Even if it was something beyond what we can physically explain, then what would it be? How would you go about testing your hypothesis that consciousness is abstract and exists independently from the brain?

[Alex K]

Wow. Wow.

Do you honestly think that science gets done "only in theory"? Do you honestly have even the faintest idea of how scientists work? Do you know how experiments are designed? Do you know what a painstaking effort it is to validate the data that you get from observations? Do you know how hard it is for a study to pass peer review and get published by reputable sources?

A scientist's job is not to spew theories disconnected from reality. Scientists observe systems and with the data they get they make a model of how the system works. The model then gets tested again and again to corroborate and correct it. It's not theory, it's practice. WAY more practice than you think.

You obviously have grown up with the myth of the arrogant, know-it-all, aloof scientist, and it really does show in the way you approach scientific subjects.

Wrong again Luc.
Nothing to do with arrogant and all to do with practice.
Practice lead to the realization whether the theory is correct or not.
What you think is practice is not.
Consciousness is an abstract entity remember that Luc.
Scientists do not understand yet that to understand the abstract you got to use an abstract tool not a physical one and this is the very point that scientists still have to understand that is why they are not getting anywhere.  

It becomes apparent that you haven't got a clue how science in general works, let alone neuroscience.

[Little Rik]

Wrong again Luc.
Nothing to do with arrogant and all to do with practice.
Practice lead to the realization whether the theory is correct or not.
What you think is practice is not.
Consciousness is an abstract entity remember that Luc.
Scientists do not understand yet that to understand the abstract you got to use an abstract tool not a physical one and this is the very point that scientists still have to understand that is why they are not getting anywhere.  

I'm sorry but this is simply not true. If consciousness is such an abstract entity, how come damage to the brain can result in severely altered states of consciousness?
I mean look at this:

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage (it's in Italian for your convenience)

Easy explained Luc.
When you drive your car and you get involved in an accident you car get smashed and most of the time you too get injured.
The consciousness being an abstract entity can not really get damaged but because is stuck inside the
pineal gland and the brain when the brain get damaged the consciousness that rely on the brain as his source of energy can not work properly that is why .............can result in severely altered states of consciousness........ as you say.

As far as the person is alive the consciousness is stuck inside this body-brain but as soon as the body-brain die the consciousness separate.
Even if the body was smashed under a roller machine the consciousness will not be touched.
She is immortal.

Even if it was something beyond what we can physically explain, then what would it be? How would you go about testing your hypothesis that consciousness is abstract and exists independently from the brain?

1) Energy and consciousness are the two sides of the same sheet.
One can not exist without the other.
Even science say that energy can not be destroyed so if energy can not be destroyed also consciousness
can not be destroyed.
2) NDEs are the evidence that consciousness never die so it is clear that consciousness once the body die
will be independent from the body.  

---

Wrong again Luc.
Nothing to do with arrogant and all to do with practice.
Practice lead to the realization whether the theory is correct or not.
What you think is practice is not.
Consciousness is an abstract entity remember that Luc.
Scientists do not understand yet that to understand the abstract you got to use an abstract tool not a physical one and this is the very point that scientists still have to understand that is why they are not getting anywhere.  

It becomes apparent that you haven't got a clue how science in general works, let alone neuroscience.

Neuroscience deals with the anatomy, biochemistry, molecular biology, and physiology of neurons and neural circuits.
That has nothing to do with consciousness and physical science as well has nothing to do with consciousness.

I guess you never thought about that Alex, did you?  

---

Your analysis badly miss something.
Psychology can only reach a certain point.
The mind is like an iceberg.
We can only see the above part.
If we want to see the part below the water we have to go under the water.
The mind is not all the same.
There is the conscious mind and the unconscious mind.
To understand the conscious mind is not a big deal but to see the unconscious mind it is.
Psychology is not the best tool to see below.
All psychology can do is to see the above part and guess what lie under in the unconscious mind
but guessing is not good enough that is why I wouldn't take for granted what psychology say.

To know what lie under in the unconscious mind a person must undertake a lot of hard work.
Is not so simple.
It takes practice and a lot of it.
Psychology doesn't undertake practice so there is no way that psychology will ever be able to understand the mind in full and here I mean the conscious and the unconscious mind.  

Ultimately I don't disagree with how you view the mind. I agree with your analogy of the conscious mind being the proverbial tip of the iceberg, which does not, normally, have access to what's below the water.

The difference though I guess is I don't see quite such a strong boundary line between conscious and subconscious... so I'd use a slightly different analogy. It's not a perfect analogy but I think it's good enough to make my point. I'd liken normal conscious awareness to a raging storm, where the wind is conscious attention, and the waves are things on which you can focus your attention. In everyday life you deal with these waves as they come at you, focusing your attention where needed (i.e. in this analogy blowing a wind), and that keeps the storm raging. But meditation deprives the waves of wind, and thus allows the storm to start to calm. The bigger waves disperse leaving smaller and subtler waves below them, which are now available to focus attention on. Deprive them of wind and they disperse, leaving even smaller waves. Deprive them of wind and there may only be ripples left. So at the end, according to this analogy, the perfect state... the state of an arahant... would be no waves at all, just a perfectly clear and still lake, as if it was ice.

That's roughly how I view meditation and what is going on during it. But I still don't call it spiritual, only psychological. But then, I use the word psychological to refer to anything of the mind, so it may or may not be the case that we are referring to the same things, just using different terminology.

All that said, I'm not that accomplished in meditation... the longest I've done is about an hour and I've never reached states like that. But I freely admit I'm not fully committed to Buddhism (I know you're not a Buddhist... but there are similarities) and therefore that, as you say, I'm only scratching the surface of what's possible with my level of involvement, but that's enough for me; as a perspective on life, even 'Buddhism-lite' has improved my life hundred-fold, and I wouldn't trade it for anything, so I'm happy with where I am, and all this recent discussion of it has sparked my interest again because I'd let it slip a bit.

But you do sound like you are an accomplished meditator? If you don't mind me asking, how long do you do it for and how frequently? And what sorts of experiences have you had in meditation?

I practice meditation twice a day but let us remember that meditation alone is not enough to trigger more
awareness in the consciousness.
Once you start the path of spirituality you got to get ready for a war.
A war against that force that try to make you sink toward materialism.
An a war to extiguish your karma.
In a war you need the army the air force the navy the intelligence and so on so you got to fight with all
that you got available.
In this way you do meditation you do asanas (exercises) you eat a vegetarian or vegan diet you help those in need you follow a code of conduct and so on.
If you fight according the instruction from your guru you can be sure that you will be the winner.  

[Mystical]

Zomg Its a little Rick!!! What's up dude?!

Don't let them get u down. I know that somewhere inside you there's a multi-dimensional, multifaceted, disenfranchised, matter bending, experimental rebel scientist whose wanted in five glarsecs by trillions of space governments for your contributions to science!

[Little Rik]

Zomg Its a little Rick!!! What's up dude?!

Don't let them get u down. I know that somewhere inside you there's a multi-dimensional, multifaceted, disenfranchised, matter bending, experimental rebel scientist whose wanted in five glarsecs by trillions of space governments for your contributions to science!

Whatever you say Luckie.