tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post8735913448906557901..comments2024-01-22T08:01:58.626-08:00Comments on Panexperientialism: Twilight of the Idols and the Cosmic MindJustinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06145123903223215665noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-19686809485641526092019-10-28T02:27:55.739-07:002019-10-28T02:27:55.739-07:00This is the proper blog for anybody who desires to...This is the proper blog for anybody who desires to search out out about this topic. You notice so much its virtually arduous to argue with you (not that I actually would need…HaHa). You positively put a brand new spin on a subject thats been written about for years. Great stuff, simply nice! <a href="https://onlinecasino1488.us.com" rel="nofollow">online gambling</a>yaklibber924https://www.blogger.com/profile/05349925023206914461noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-2283442067274609712018-10-26T00:34:31.075-07:002018-10-26T00:34:31.075-07:00Re constraints of individual consciousnes, in &quo...Re constraints of individual consciousnes, in "Brief Peaks Beyond" Kastrup says:<br /><br />" The fact that contents of consciousness fall outside the control of our personal volition does not imply that they originate outside consciousness itself. After all, there are plenty of examples of undeniably mental phenomena that we do not identify with and can- <br />not control: our nightmares, schizophrenic hallucinations, spontaneous visions, <br />certain obsessions and compulsions, etc. Schizophrenics do not identify with and <br />cannot control their hallucinations; they experience them as external phenomena. <br />Yet, their hallucinations are entirely mental. Similarly, we do not identify with and <br />cannot control the part of our psyches that generates our dreams and nightmares, <br />otherwise we would never have the latter."<br /><br />There are lots of varieties of idealism around of course, but I think Kastrup's is one variety that aims to be consistent with contemporary physics and neurophysiology. Generally, I am not a big fan of idealism as I think it can lead to "otherworldliness" and distract from the problems of the real world, but I think Kastrup's model can be interpreted in a way that circumvents this (hence the blog post).Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06145123903223215665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-48629765051061913902018-10-24T10:46:17.664-07:002018-10-24T10:46:17.664-07:00Reading some more, maybe he does try to explain ho...Reading some more, maybe he does try to explain how it works with his "experiences are patterns of self-excitation of cosmic consciousness".<br /><br />Seems very strained to me without making any really cogent argument for self-excitation other than an "inherent disposition to self-excitation".<br /><br />Seems like Hindu/Buddhist concept of Maya - cosmic consciousness disguises itself in experiential consciousness and hides its eternal reality.Jim Crosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12359287601046663774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-61891999484014124082018-10-24T08:06:16.962-07:002018-10-24T08:06:16.962-07:00I've seen the group and joined it.
Even if ev...I've seen the group and joined it.<br /><br />Even if everything is not "my" consciousness, why does my consciousness have constraints? I should be able to take on the identity of a bird and fly if there are no external constraints.<br /><br />Conceivably, I guess, Kastrup could argue there are constraints built into cosmic consciousness, or a structure to cosmic consciousness that involves constraints, or perhaps better that the creation of an individual identity or individual consciousness involves the imposition of constraints. I have looked at everything he's written so I am not sure he goes into how any of that works.<br /><br />Certainly ideas similar to this are implicit in many religions and belief systems. Reincarnation contains the idea of souls (fragments of cosmic consciousness?) that move from one limited form of existence to another - animals to humans to beings on higher planes - a sort of serial DID in different physical manifestations .The concept of gnosis also implies that our real nature is divine or, in other words, our real consciousness is cosmic, and our limited form is an illusion. <br /><br />So I don't see a lot new in what Kastrup's offers except he puts a more philosophical, non-religious spin on it.<br /><br />Jim Crosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12359287601046663774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-17554695870774138502018-10-24T01:01:55.657-07:002018-10-24T01:01:55.657-07:00The neural mapping concept makes sense though I th...The neural mapping concept makes sense though I think whether this developed from a more primitive consciousness rather than visa versa is debatable. Kastrup would disagree that if everything is consciousness, I should be able to make the world however I want (as in his model, while everything is consciousness, not everything is 'my'consciousness ). <br />BTW he also runs a quite active google group called metaphysical speculations you might be interested in: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/metaphysical-speculationsJustinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-10397026631495931372018-10-22T04:18:51.795-07:002018-10-22T04:18:51.795-07:00My view is in many ways not too different from Kas...My view is in many ways not too different from Kastrup's but definitely different.<br /><br />Everything is not consciousness but everything we know is. It's a subtle difference, maybe some would say no difference at all, but it avoids the problem of why I can't fly or jump off a building and live. If everything is consciousness, I should be able to make the world however I want but I am constrained by things outside of consciousness. Those things I only know about through consciousness and likely are tremendously distorted by the representations of consciousness. It is possible that these constraints are more malleable and less fixed than they appear to be because my representations are imperfect. Still that doesn't mean there are no constraints whatsoever on consciousness. So everything is not consciousness. <br /><br />To some extent, Kastrup's view seems to be rehash of the mind/brain as receiver viewpoint. Consciousness is like a television station broadcasting reality and our minds are its receivers. His nuance is that we are all tuning into our own personal programs.<br /><br />At any rate, I think DID is an imperfect model for this. I have never seen any evidence that suggests that organisms other than humans suffer from DID and, if there were such evidence, I would suspect it would only be seen in social organisms. Our sense of identity (as the I in DID) is a part of consciousness but it is a social construct and a higher order function from core consciousness.<br /><br />From an evolutionary standpoint, I see consciousness developing from an ability to create neural maps of the external world, including the body itself as an entity external to the brain. Consciousness across organisms is similar in the sense that this mapping technology is similar. Jim Crosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12359287601046663774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-18064509086210968742018-10-22T02:38:52.564-07:002018-10-22T02:38:52.564-07:00Hi Jim
Kastrup's model is a form of idealism s...Hi Jim<br />Kastrup's model is a form of idealism so basically everything is consciousness, including the universe and spacetime itself. I would say that alters with similar organismic structures (with such structures being how those portions of cosmic consciousness appear to an alter) could be inferred to have similar qualia though, yes, that doesn't tell us anything about what it's like to be a bat. Kastrup has also written a lot of books and other articles that go into more detail than the article I linked to. Can't say I understand, have read or agree with all of it, but I find it a very interesting model nonetheless.<br />Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06145123903223215665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7449019.post-78580003568508397002018-10-20T06:56:41.655-07:002018-10-20T06:56:41.655-07:00In what sense is cosmic consciousness "cosmic...In what sense is cosmic consciousness "cosmic"? What does it mean to be cosmic.<br /><br />Does it mean it is pervasive across the universe?<br /><br />Does it imply some commonality across living organisms? Do all the alters see red the same way?<br /><br />For that matter, do all of the dissociative identities see red the same way (except for a blind one)? We would think they would since the red is being produced by the identical vision system.<br /><br />I would think dissociative disorders are produced by some re- or dis-organization at different level of consciousness from core consciousness and hence can't be used to compare the difference in consciousness between a bat and myself.Jim Crosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12359287601046663774noreply@blogger.com