A Field Theorists Perspective on Consciousness

No you won't you're gonna copy and paste more videos and be like "THIS PROVES GOD... READ IT OR WATCH THIS 8 hour video .." That's how it always goes . I'm asking you to summarize to know if you actually read it and if you actually understand it instead of just fucking copying and pasting mountains of shit. Whenever I or anyone else here talk science we paraphrase everything instead of quoting verbatim.  If you really understand it you should beable type most of the concepts clearly in a concise  and coherent manner. but every thread all you do is "link" "quote""video" "conclusion" "restate conclusion" "restate conclusion" "I reached cloud nine" " I transcend the ego so I see the truth" " 
 
If you ever wrote an essay exam and pull shit like this you'd  get fucked more times  than cunts get fucked by cervical cancer.

 

What is this "consciousness" of which you speak?  Can you show it to us under a microscope?
 
Don't confuse the capabilities of the planet's most advanced biological robots with magical dualistic floaty-souly minds. The existence of the former does not imply the latter.

 

"I'm too ignorant to think outside the box, that's why I'll just stick to what I think I know".
 
Experiences will create belief, problem is a lot of people are missing the experience. Don't get pissy when someone links a youtube video if you're not going to watch it. The videos can express things more clearly than a paragraph over a forum can.

 

 
 
 
All it takes is a mans inteiligance to prove the existance of god? 

 

 
This is the problem with believers.. I am going to guess that you're on the younger side of life, still going through the experiences. So you assume everyone else is too, failing to realize that those you talk to may have been there, done that long ago. When you subscribe to a belief, you're automatically putting yourself in a box. I don't have a supernatural belief system, so I am not inside a box to even try to think outside of to begin with in terms of a spiritual belief. Once proper evidence is presented that can be tested and verified through the scientific community, then I'll consider adding the facts to my personal belief on how the universe and life came to be.
 
And you're confusing my making fun of him as getting pissy.. It's common occurrence that the person I was responding to goes on about their belief system, but when asked to expand either links a YouTube video or copy and pastes someone else's argument. It's lazy, if you have a belief system and you want people to see your point of view, give them your point of view. Don't just say "I have a belief, but I am going to use someone else's words to get my point across".. Lazy lazy lazy.
 
Not only that, I find it funny that someone who claims an open mind just goes off of someone else's belief.. If I kept going around and saying "I am enlightened and have an open mind, but rather than formulate my belief, I am just going to listen to someone else and have them make up my mind."
 
And YouTube videos are useless for educational purposes if there isn't anything educational about them.. like most of the videos people post to back up their spiritual belief.

 

I think as much as it has to do with maturity, education and experience, I think it also has to do with the function of the media.
 
Videos and links are useful because they appeal to the frantic piecemeal understanding promoted by the internet medium. The deep linear reciprocal discourse that some of us longtime regulars are familiar with seems strange and useless to the younger generation. But that's because our dominant media tend not to be blogs and internet videos, rather they are journal articles, books, and years of extensive lectures.
 
There is also quite an emotional stake in all of this, which is quite problematic. PP is often declaring his beliefs as they related to he determination of self-identity. Despite some of us working and being published professionals in our field of academic inquiry, I've very rarely seen anybody argue their authority - it's usually through the appropriate introduction of facts and figures, through detailed discussion on theoretical assumptions. It's not that these epistemology are divorced from identity, but rather it is the tactic knowledge that such chauvinism do us a disservice and corrode our ability to exercise reflexivity
 
EDIT: this is not intended to be a jab at anybody. It is simply an acknowledgement that communication issues may arise from varied approaches to the form and function of the dominant media. Most of these issues arise not necessarily from epistemology differences, but a problematic socialization process that results in largely incongruent approaches.

 

 
All beliefs are based upon assumptions.
 
Any kind of behaviour requires assumptions.

 

 
In your understanding of scientific epistemology, how are 'assumptions' and 'models' related entites?
 
I'm genuinely curious. I began to write an explanation for your benefit, but then realized it would be patronizing and possibly unproductive. Could I possibly get your personal definition, and not a link or video?

 

You have as much a belief system as I do. Your belief is materialism, subscribing only to the physical. I think a person can go through their whole life without the right experience so age is irrelevant. In fact the older you become the more set you're beliefs become, so it's almost counterproductive. If you'd 'been there done that', then you wouldn't only believe in measurable things.

"Once proper evidence is presented that can be tested and verified through the scientific community, then I'll consider adding the facts to my personal belief on how the universe and life came to be."
That right there, that's you're belief system. That's the box you're in. You need to realize that the nature of what you're talking about is not measurable in the scientific way. Which is why it takes the experience to understand, otherwise it's like trying to describe a feeling or emotion, you can use words an adjectives, but you won't really get it until you feel it.

And to be clear I'm not talking about god or anything really intelligent making decisions, so I don't like the term 'believer'. It's something you feel for a split second, almost blacking out in a way. But you come back thinking 'I get it, I can't explain it but I get it'. The moment you try to put words to it it becomes something it's not. It's something natural, not supernatural. I'm not trying to convert anyone or anything, just urge them that there's something more to nature than we can physically measure.

And I havnt taken others beliefs from YouTube videos. It's that after I've learned things on my own, I've done research only to find out that others have discovered the exact same thing. When I first realized what I'm talking about, I wasn't surfing the Internet, I was sitting there staring into space, which is why I was amazed when I saw others have known what I thought. REAL knowledge, the important knowledge, comes from within you.

 

 
I completely agree.. with the internet media, I wouldn't call myself a professional anything, lol. I believe the internet was a blessing and a curse. As a blessing, it really opened us up on what goes on around the world. Could get to know people from other countries from the people themselves and not what was portrayed on the news. It's pretty much the closest thing I could consider a "collective conscious".. The curse comes in with trying to learn everything from it. I had it in high school, but I barely used it for learning.. if ever. Now it's expanded to what it is today and there is just so much to learn. So quick videos and entertaining reads are the norm now.. but the bad part comes in when these quick videos only take the basis of an idea and make false connections that make sense to those who don't dive deep into a specific subject. When you try "studying" everything, you only get a framing of understanding that isn't really filled in. So one of these quick, entertaining videos comes along and fills it in, but fills it in incorrectly and they know no better cause they don't/won't do actual work and research in a specific subject..
 
Not to mention that we are still pretty damn impressionable til about the age of 25.. Like I would of done if someone said that to me when I was a teenager, they'll probably deny it and then cuss you out. These videos leave an impression, not just because they falsely connect the dots.. but because they're entertaining on top of that. I personally can't stand watching anything longer than 5-10 minutes if it's gimmickry, even if it's something I am interested in. I like documentaries where there is pretty much no music other than maybe the opening and credits.. Stable camera angles, no FX. As long as it's something I am interested in, doesn't need to be flashy to reel in my attention.
 

 
You do realize that you pointed out 3 flaws right before you hopped back up on your high horse to say you'd care to not point out my flaws? That would be that same as someone saying "You're a douche bag and I think your face is ugly.. Your nose looks dumb and it makes me want to murder you, but there's no point in insulting or threatening you.. It's not something I care for."
 

 
To both of you, if you would of taken the time to actually read what I said, I said I don't have a supernatural belief system.. You're assuming that I made the claim I don't have any beliefs period or doing it on purpose just so you have a reason to argue. While I would call them theories, I have beliefs on the natural order of things.
 
Luvs, for lack of a better phrase, you're preaching to the choir about there being more than we know about in terms of the natural order of things.. There's a lot more, but it's not that there is more to nature than we can physically measure.. just that we can't physically measure yet. If it's a part of the natural universe, I see no reason to believe that we or some other intelligent species can't on day observe it. Hell, some might have an understanding of not just things on the quantum level, but several layers deeper. We don't know how far back matter and energy can be broken down, could possibly go on forever.
 
God and a conscious universe are both supernatural beliefs. Labels to fill the gaps of understanding on how things actually work.. They are not falsifiable and therefore just as likely of a possibility to any other theory. That's why I won't subscribe to a supernatural belief.. They are typically beliefs that we create outside of our ability to test them. I've got theories out the ass on many different concepts, but I am not going to act like they are true, let alone try "opening" someone up to it when it could be completely wrong without stating that it's a theory. If you knew me in person, you'd know that I start a good many of my statements and conversations (mainly coworkers) with "I have a theory.." cause that's what I like to do. Use my imagination to create theories and thoughts, it's a natural part of humans and life. Problem lies when we are young and our brains haven't fully developed yet.. I bet when you're nearing 30, you'll look back and see a noticeable change in your emotions from around 24-26. Probably won't notice it when you're experiencing it, but I bet it'll happen. Before our brains fully mature, we're more slave to our emotions than we'd care to admit.. and then the imagination get worked in with the emotional connection and even if it's wrong, you can still 'feel' as if it were right. As we get older, our emotions control us less..

 

PP you are the one claiming you have it all figured out. Manitkore said several times that we don't know everything