(April 17, 2012 at 12:08 pm)Perhaps Wrote: It is what creates the other two forms of reality. It therefore controls how the material and the abstract behave. What are we past our perceptions? What exists outside of consciousness? What allows you to 'know' that things outside of your mind exist?Nothing. And on a fundamental level, nothing exists in a definable state outside of your mind. But that is explained by simple relativity and QM - values are subjective and therefore indeterminate before interaction/coupling.
(April 17, 2012 at 12:08 pm)Perhaps Wrote:No genkaus isn't. You are. The mind is an internal construct of the brain - a specific quantum state defined by a given set of neural signals that interacts with other signals, thereby physically ceasing and reconstructing. This explains its constant change.(April 17, 2012 at 4:53 am)genkaus Wrote: You contradict yourself. As you have maintained, the mind is dependent upon the brain for its existence and it does not outlast the brain. In that case, it is the material construct which would allow for the existence of the mind.
You are viewing the supposition from the reverse. When the mind ceases, so to do our perceptions of the material world - including the brain. We perceive the brain ceasing as the end of the mind, but it is the mind ceasing which causes an end to the brain's perceived existence.
(April 17, 2012 at 12:08 pm)Perhaps Wrote: What is the material world? What is true? We are confined by our perception; we are limited by our awareness. The true material world is simply what you perceive your world to be. Once again, the material world does exist, but as for how closely our perceptions of that world are to being what it truly looks like - we can never know. An objective material world (not like the one you believe you are experiencing) would explain the same perceptions, while the mind accounts for the differing perceptions among this objectiveness.
Simply stated, the idea that we are all experiencing a hard surface right now would be a good inclination towards believing that a hard surface is a part oYou are making two contradictory claims: there is an objective world, but if the objective material world (that our perception is close to what the actual material world looks like). The idea that you see 'red' when I see 'blue' reinforces that color is merely a perception created by the mind and is not innate within the 'true' material world.
You explain this difference by claiming there is some other "true" objective world and we for some reason don't observe it properly. You are then claiming this "objective" reality has properties the components of it cannot observe, and therefore do not interact with. If they don't interact with these properties, by your very own definition, they have no distinguishable existence and are irrelevant.
This additional construction of yours has no effect on the component systems. How can it if it doesn't effect them (if it did, it would be observable)? Somehow though, this is more "fundamental". Here's a different idea: there is no objective existence, and all existence is fundamentally subjective. This is confirmed by relativity, more modern interpretations of quantum mechanics, has testable hypotheses (all of which so far have been confirmed), and requires no super-soul metaphysics.
"Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme executive power derives from a mandate by the masses, not some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
- Dennis the peasant.
- Dennis the peasant.
