Discussão ocorrendo no Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/799987083411428/
I wish to talk about The self.
It’s commonly accepted that self is who we are. It is our identity. I think it can also mean ‘a soul’.
But if we do look at the self, what exactly is that?
I don’t know.
For me, there is nothing that is ‘self’. But there are emotions I experience. There are thoughts I have. And I do not have any sense of self.
Plenty of times I tried to define it. It always fails. There’s never any one thing that I was able to see as the self... (see more)
Plenty of times I tried to define it. It always fails. There’s never any one thing that I was able to see as the self... (see more)
Louis Charles Morelli
Don't worry to understand me because my opinions are from a very different culture. In my native language we use the word ego. Ego is what think, which says "I am". Have you noticed that our brain has the shape of an ovule being penetrated by an spermatozoon? The spinal cord seems the tail of the spermatozoon. It means that the human brain is a kind of placenta, the hippocampus is the ovule, there is a new event of creation occurring there. Creation of consciousness. So, our physical bodies are like genes, the ego is a kind of plasmatic substance representing the mother's mind of this body. A link between biological matter and a fetus inside a bubble, which is consciousness. This fetus can not drive the physical body neither the ego, but its substance is impregnating the ego, so, sometimes can interfering into the ego. From here, evolution will make that we will be less dense physical body, less dense ego e more consciousness. In this way we and all our aliens intelligent brothers in this Universe, started at the Big Bang and are going towards the Big Birth, as cosmic consciousness. Do not worry, you have a warranted supreme future! Or... I am totally wrong here ...The physical shape of the ego is like a ring, a cover of the bubble where the fetus of consciousness is being nurtured. But, my theoretical model of light waves is suggesting that egos has this "light" substance and since all light waves are working systems, the egos is also composed by parts as an individual system.
xxxx
Paul Beard
Frank Rizzo There is no credible evidence to support the belief in a universal consciousness or a continuation of human consciousness after necrotic brain death.Louis Charles Morelli
Paul Beard It is good you remembering this argument for those going to believe in universal consciousness. But there is no credible evidence to support the belief that the stupid matter and forces of this lost planet could creating only by itself, consciousness. There is a mathematical theorem, from Tarsky-Turing I think, indicating that mater in no way can jump to a state where it becomes self-conscious. Considering these two arguments at my young times I thought that we have no data to solve this puzzle. Later I saw an astonishing pattern between the Universal History how Science knows it and the history of a human embryo genesis. Then, since that I am preferring the hypothesis that there is an ex-universal consciousness because the last evolved thing from human embryo genesis is consciousness and transporting it to universal history you get that the ultimately purpose of this universe existence is reproducing its creator, be it what can be. Embryogenesis is a weak evidence that the thing that triggered the Big Bang was conscious, but the unique we have. By the way you will not understand my thought because you do not know or do not accept the pattern I am based upon.
Paul Beard
Louis Charles Morelli I would give it serious consideration if you had any actual credible evidence to support your hypothesis. But as it stands it has no more credible evidence to support it that the existence of unicorns. Do you mean the pattern on which you believe are based on.Louis Charles Morelli
Paul Beard I know and understand the rocket science that reduces this property of being aware to the neuro/electro/chemical picture captured by our brain sensors in the lab. And maybe it is all that exists. But the idea of specialness can be produced by this rocket science that believes our poor and limited brain's sensors can capture the whole thing and so, being the owner of thru. When I see the electromagnetic spectrum and remember that we can see only one strip of a wave of light that has seven strips, I try to imagine to calculate what we are not seeing from the most simple objects. I can't have this idea of specialness, so, I don't know the thru, neither what is consciousness. But reductionism of rocket science is the cause of our different culture/worldview and I will show an example: You say that "All living things are consciousness". My systemic world view says different. There is no separation between living and non-living natural systems, from atoms to galaxies to cells. All biological properties are present into atoms and galaxies in their most single evolved way, as mechanistic process or electromagnetic process. If you say that a human is alive, you must say that an atom is alive to, the wrong thing here is the human concept defined by the word "life". And those ancestors systems does not express consciousness, like the shape of morulae, blastulae and even fetus does not express it. But you know that consciousness is encrypted genetically into those shapes. So, consciousness is encrypted into galaxies and atoms till the Big Bang. If you don't see in this way, you have the reason to be furiious when someone talks about universal consciousness, I understand it. And what is the evidence that the portion of consciousness linked to a human brain dies with the brain if we even can not proof what is or how is consciousness in a living brain?!
Paul Beard
Louis Charles Morelli So you’ve got a vivid imagination so what?Louis Charles Morelli Paul Beard I don't know where you got this idea of vivid imagination, I know that my world view is not based upon such thing. It is the result of 7 years studying the whole biosphere of Amazon jungle, applying non-usual scientific methods but always knowing and obeying the scientific data that you knows. It is hard work of naturalist philosophers working at the field. But when modern academics are separating Cosmological Evolution from Biological evolution they falls in a vivid imagination necessary to explain everything created from cosmological evolution, like the origins of life, the origins of consciousness, etc. And this vivid imagination is driving them to believe on unbelievable fantasies, like something comes from nothing, or that was a magical unicorn by chance creating life here from non living matter. That's it my friend... only time will be the judge between us, while nobody can prove these theories
Paul Beard
Louis Charles Morelli I’m not sure modern science separates the evolutionary process into segments and can’t think how that would be helpful. It is after all the same process viewed differently by different interests. Latest work in QM does not point to something from nothing.Louis Charles Morelli
I think it separates in this way: starting at the Big Bang evolution made atoms from particles, stars from atoms, galaxies from stars systems. This is Cosmological Evolution, there is its own laws, mechanisms, etc. Then, at 3,5 billion years ago began biological evolution, with different mechanisms. And it began from ingredients inside a galaxy and not coming from cosmological evolution because there is no evolutionary link between this galaxy an the first living being - a cell system. When I discovered that if you calculate a new type of arrangement, connections, among the seven know astronomic bodies, based upon the fact that this galaxy produced here ( a cell system), you get a model of astronomic system that has the same image of the DNA's building block. Not only the image but each part of the cell makes a systemic function identical to each part of an astronomic body. And, both, the building block of galaxies, the building block of DNA and the systemic circuit of a cell are identical. Suggested conclusion? Yes, there is an evolutionary link between cosmological and biological evolution, between this galaxy and the first DNA, and later, the first cell. It is the whole galaxy, with its all forces and elements that self-projected at Earth surface lifting up as a living cell. Life's origins was not created from random ingredients, but from a genetically transmitted system. This change the academic world view and so on. Of course, I have no appropriate scientific instruments to prove it and as Einstein said: " One does not need to prove that his theory is right, only that it makes sense". And I think that universal evolution as a unique process, same mechanisms, is more rational for explaining the origins of life and lots things more than believing that origins of life was based on random ingredients by chance and nature had invented two methods of evolution. Ok, there are thousands of evidences I am accumulating at my website, but it is not enough since that a half-monkey fro Amazon jungle, even that being a naturalist philosopher, is not listened by the academic staff. Give time to time.
Louis Charles Morelli Paul Beard We are going out of topic ( Tina will pull us out off the room), but you said "Latest work in QM does not point to something from nothing." Do you mean that Krauss was debunked or that QM has news proving that the nothing of Krauss which is not really nothing is the right thing? Any link, please?
NOT PUBLISHED:
Ashbro Mahbrahman My theories are not product of imagination, always it is based upon known facts. Consciousness inside this Universe must be product of reproduction of consciousness existing outside and before the Universe. Some evidences: 1) At embryogenesis, a human gets expression of consciousness only when the brain is formed, at about six or eight months. In another hand, the Universe waited 13,8 billion years for getting expressed consciousness, only when the human species brain was formed. What's the problem? Eight human months is equal to 13,8 billions universe's years, merely a relativistic issue. 2) Before the human brain, the body had the shapes of a single cell, morulae, blastulae... before the human species brain inside the universe we had the shapes of single atoms, star systems, galactic systems... what is the problem?3) The wave of light emitted at the Big Bang has as it anatomy the same configuration of the building block of human genome. So, what caused the Big Bang and the universe starting was a kind of genome. 4) The last and more complex shape of universal evolution is now, consciousness. The last shape at embryogenesis is the shape of its creator, the human species. So, consciousness is the shape of universe creator. Now go searching hypothesis, building theoretical models, etc., that noone has saw nowhere and anytime... you are creating imaginations. Why you can not accept that there is no mystery in this world, the explanations are so simple, it is enough that you - instead asking to rekigious imaginations - ask the questions direct to real and pristine Nature as I did at Amazon jungle. Nature will point out a natural real phenomena that answer each question, nature does not plays dice with its creatures. What is ego? Nature answer: when the primordial light wave carrying on the genome of the natural and conscious system creator is propagating among dark matter, the friction creates energy, in which gores encripted the genetic informations on the light. So, ego is the eletric system resulting from the friction between the embryo of conciousness that is growing with the matter of your brain... simple like that...
