What is Mind?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Uriahharris » July 21st, 2014, 8:22 pm

Subatomic God wrote:
Uriahharris wrote:
Let me put straight out the definition of contradict so that you may understand.

con·tra·dict [kon-truh-dikt]
verb (used with object) 1. to assert the contrary or opposite of; deny directly and categorically. 2. to speak contrary to the assertions of: to contradict oneself. 3. (of an action or event) to imply a denial of: His way of life contradicts his stated principles. 4. Obsolete . to speak or declare against; oppose.

In this, i have correctly used the definition of contradict. A contradiction then is just that, light and dark are contradictions, because they speak contrary to the assertions of "light" for light in definition is the absence of darkness, one cannot exist without the other. They contradict one another in there existence, yet rely on each other, for they oppose each other which fits in the definition of contradiction. As for being ignorant, of course, I cannot prove any theory to be law, nor can anyone else prove it to be so either. To claim truth above another truth is of a higher ignorance however. One cannot claim to be of superior intellect, especially with your theory of everyone possessing the same mind, for if that is so, everyone is on the same level yes? If we all have the same potential, then everyone is equal, and the universe is of equal and balanced properties yes? I have yet to figure out your esteem as far as knowledge of the universe goes, however. What is it you hold high in the universe? Physics, philosophy, religion? What is it you hold to be the "right" ideal (if you can honestly claim to be right). For as long as doubt exists, nothing can be true, and as doubt has to exist for truth to exist, there can be no true truth. Logic in itself is the one and only principal by which we hold as a solid foundation, as the basis of everything in science and philosophy. But what can you argue to be logic, in its majesty? You seem to praise extroverted thoughts and ideals over introverted ones, which is where we difer. For all extroverted thoughts and ideals, come from an introverted process. How can you claim to talk to the universe when you cannot be certain of your own reality, and what you see and hear to be true? What claim can you lay before first without a doubt proving your own logic and self to be true. For science can progress infinitely, but what will it amount to if we never progress inwards in philosophy and psychology? In what way can we progress if we do not challenge the impossibilities that paradoxes, contradictions, and the limit of human reason propose? I am by no means a mathematical genius, a physics mastermind. I lay claim to only myself and my inner thoughts, of which is all anyone has isn't it?
The definition does not fit how the Universe works. Nothing is contradictory - you'd be insulting the Universe by calling it that, when everything works in union as it does with or without your naivety. So no, you have incorrectly used it by even slightly thinking the Universe is contradicting itself because you think it is through ignorance of how it truly behaves. Light and dark are not contradictions because everything is one, in the end. Our split personalities do not contradict one or the other, because they are individual states created within one system. Again, you do not understand this Universe.

Everyone possesses the same tool, the brain. I did not say the mind. You're taking things out of context like a person takes apart a computer - to learn from it. You don't understand, so you're trying to understand by making it more difficult.

All introverted processes are from outside, then managed from inside, which are then projected back outwards. You'd have to be truly naive to think that there's a one-way ticket for information in a world that is clearly perpetual! Think of a black hole. There are three stages: The already projected > swallowed > then spat out as another projection.

There are no paradoxes and infinities in life. The only reason why that seems so, is because of how the Universe creates possibilities. Human experience can even have a taste of this notion. All you have to do is let go, and go back to point o - where you can choose anything in the world, but whence a choice is made, you become limited. When a choice hasn't been made, you are infinite. That's the secret to the Universe. A blank canvas can hold anything - a canvas with a picture on top of it can only do so much without distorting and crowding itself. This is why children are infinite, and adults are finite. We live in a world that forces adults to make choices, while children are free to make their own choices until a certain age - then there are the few that escape this vicious cycle to truly understand freedom and the Universe.

Science is not infinite, in a good way. It goes down a basic formula to more complicated formulas, which sooner or later lead us astray.
Let me go back to simplistics then, with a simple logical idea. If a child is born with all his senses (touch,taste,smell,hear,taste) then he experiences roughly this "universe" of which you state. However, what of a child born with no senses, others may be able to see him but he cannot see others. In the childs mind nothing and everything exists, he is not pre-disposed to laws or non laws yet. Individualization, being non-connected to one another is the basis of sophisism. If you say that we are all connected to a single universe, and that science holds true even in the philosophical world, by what basis do you hold this true? For until we are connected by a sixth sense or technology to anothers brain and mind, how can you know that anything other than yourself exists, or that you exist at all as well? For in a sense deprived state you cannot experience the universe and thus, with individualization, and perspective, nothing can exist beyond yourself. Universe is not law, when looked at from the point of perspective and individualization. You can talk about how universe is the only one way and that you are connected to it, because you were born with your senses and have been predisposed to this, however, logically, it does not necessarilly hold as an entire truth and basis for everything. With this could you not argue the universe is a product of our minds, and we not the product of the universe? Thinking beyond physical is the aim of philosophy no? To answer the fundamentally estranged questions.
-UriahHarris

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 21st, 2014, 8:37 pm

Uriahharris wrote:
Let me go back to simplistics then, with a simple logical idea. If a child is born with all his senses (touch,taste,smell,hear,taste) then he experiences roughly this "universe" of which you state. However, what of a child born with no senses, others may be able to see him but he cannot see others. In the childs mind nothing and everything exists, he is not pre-disposed to laws or non laws yet. Individualization, being non-connected to one another is the basis of sophisism. If you say that we are all connected to a single universe, and that science holds true even in the philosophical world, by what basis do you hold this true? For until we are connected by a sixth sense or technology to anothers brain and mind, how can you know that anything other than yourself exists, or that you exist at all as well? For in a sense deprived state you cannot experience the universe and thus, with individualization, and perspective, nothing can exist beyond yourself. Universe is not law, when looked at from the point of perspective and individualization. You can talk about how universe is the only one way and that you are connected to it, because you were born with your senses and have been predisposed to this, however, logically, it does not necessarilly hold as an entire truth and basis for everything. With this could you not argue the universe is a product of our minds, and we not the product of the universe? Thinking beyond physical is the aim of philosophy no? To answer the fundamentally estranged questions.

A solipsist? You were born from a fetus and are challenged by your supposed projection, me. Solipsists are too naive to accept self-humility, because that's all it takes to eliminate solipsism. You can't expect such an idea to exist in an ever-changing world. Either solipsism suggests the world was projected from the brain and senses, or that the world is continuously being projected by the brain and senses - either way, you will come to find out that such ideas would not stand accurate in a Universe that does not adhere to such concepts.

No, this entire Universe existed far beyond our time. Our eyes consist of photo receptors which existed before the birth of stars, billions of years ago. Our eyes are shaped like the birth of a galaxy and the patterns within the eye are shaped like a nebula. The neurons in our brain are shaped like the Universe. The lungs have root-like patterns, like plants. Our bodies emit a colorful array of electromagnetic waves of energy like planets do. Therefore we are made in the Universe's image - the Universe is not made in our image.

The Universe is an absolute system (a law consisted of faculties creating in different forms, on different scales) that is not finished, but becoming. The human experience in the realm of solipsism would be absolutely absurd, as human experience hasn't existed very long compared to the Universe which encompasses everything; there's evidence that we are shaped by this Universe, and that everything on the outside existed before the human brain, or its senses.

As above, so below; from form, to faculty; to, and fro.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Uriahharris » July 22nd, 2014, 12:47 pm

Subatomic God wrote:
Uriahharris wrote:
Let me go back to simplistics then, with a simple logical idea. If a child is born with all his senses (touch,taste,smell,hear,taste) then he experiences roughly this "universe" of which you state. However, what of a child born with no senses, others may be able to see him but he cannot see others. In the childs mind nothing and everything exists, he is not pre-disposed to laws or non laws yet. Individualization, being non-connected to one another is the basis of sophisism. If you say that we are all connected to a single universe, and that science holds true even in the philosophical world, by what basis do you hold this true? For until we are connected by a sixth sense or technology to anothers brain and mind, how can you know that anything other than yourself exists, or that you exist at all as well? For in a sense deprived state you cannot experience the universe and thus, with individualization, and perspective, nothing can exist beyond yourself. Universe is not law, when looked at from the point of perspective and individualization. You can talk about how universe is the only one way and that you are connected to it, because you were born with your senses and have been predisposed to this, however, logically, it does not necessarilly hold as an entire truth and basis for everything. With this could you not argue the universe is a product of our minds, and we not the product of the universe? Thinking beyond physical is the aim of philosophy no? To answer the fundamentally estranged questions.

A solipsist? You were born from a fetus and are challenged by your supposed projection, me. Solipsists are too naive to accept self-humility, because that's all it takes to eliminate solipsism. You can't expect such an idea to exist in an ever-changing world. Either solipsism suggests the world was projected from the brain and senses, or that the world is continuously being projected by the brain and senses - either way, you will come to find out that such ideas would not stand accurate in a Universe that does not adhere to such concepts.

No, this entire Universe existed far beyond our time. Our eyes consist of photo receptors which existed before the birth of stars, billions of years ago. Our eyes are shaped like the birth of a galaxy and the patterns within the eye are shaped like a nebula. The neurons in our brain are shaped like the Universe. The lungs have root-like patterns, like plants. Our bodies emit a colorful array of electromagnetic waves of energy like planets do. Therefore we are made in the Universe's image - the Universe is not made in our image.

The Universe is an absolute system (a law consisted of faculties creating in different forms, on different scales) that is not finished, but becoming. The human experience in the realm of solipsism would be absolutely absurd, as human experience hasn't existed very long compared to the Universe which encompasses everything; there's evidence that we are shaped by this Universe, and that everything on the outside existed before the human brain, or its senses.

As above, so below; from form, to faculty; to, and fro.
It seems you did not grasp my logical steps. On regards to your comment, where did this entire universe "rant" come from? You seem to have many ideas regarding the structure of the universe and how we play into it. I have yet to see any logical steps however, it does not make rational sense to the reader, you cannot argue by just stating " such ideas would not stand accurate in a universe that does not adhere to such concepts", where is your logical steps? What proof do you have or evidence to support this claim, much less any of your claims. You seem to highly disregard others theories without supporting your own. If you cannot support your theories with logical steps and substantial evidence, I see no reason to continue this argument for it is much like talking to a religious leader. Disregarding all logic to "believe" in their own, with no support for their theories other then disregarding others. Im sorry, this argument has no value in philosophy anymore, when logic seems to go away, and it fades into "belief".
-UriahHarris

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 22nd, 2014, 5:26 pm

Uriahharris wrote:
It seems you did not grasp my logical steps. On regards to your comment, where did this entire universe "rant" come from? You seem to have many ideas regarding the structure of the universe and how we play into it. I have yet to see any logical steps however, it does not make rational sense to the reader, you cannot argue by just stating " such ideas would not stand accurate in a universe that does not adhere to such concepts", where is your logical steps? What proof do you have or evidence to support this claim, much less any of your claims. You seem to highly disregard others theories without supporting your own. If you cannot support your theories with logical steps and substantial evidence, I see no reason to continue this argument for it is much like talking to a religious leader. Disregarding all logic to "believe" in their own, with no support for their theories other then disregarding others. Im sorry, this argument has no value in philosophy anymore, when logic seems to go away, and it fades into "belief".
"logical steps", is why you don't see the actual logical steps, because you live in an illogical society, based on illogical practices, called "literal". This Universe is not literal; it's metaphorical. That means the only way to truly understand it, is to escape from the distinctive illusions, and see the world via energy, vibration and frequency, not how we perceive it, because the world is anything but what we want it to be. It comes down to Allegory of the Cave; people play with shadows, making their own realities, unwilling to escape from their facades they had created unknowingly.

If you can't see how water is older than the planet itself. That the planet produces colorful arrays of electromagnetic waves like the human body. If you can see that the human eye has patterns akin to the Universe. That the photo receptors that capture our experience were formed prior to stars. That our lungs are based on plant design. That our heart is based on four stages of four different sea creatures. That our entire neuron system is based on the patterns in the Universe. That human life is existing upon these energies, and reacting, flowing according to these energies - that we are negative and positive because of the ions within us. That our emotions follow Newton's laws, because we are the Universe's atomic energies living a conscious experience in the end. Then you're blind - no buts, no questions.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Uriahharris » July 22nd, 2014, 5:32 pm

Subatomic God wrote:
Uriahharris wrote:
It seems you did not grasp my logical steps. On regards to your comment, where did this entire universe "rant" come from? You seem to have many ideas regarding the structure of the universe and how we play into it. I have yet to see any logical steps however, it does not make rational sense to the reader, you cannot argue by just stating " such ideas would not stand accurate in a universe that does not adhere to such concepts", where is your logical steps? What proof do you have or evidence to support this claim, much less any of your claims. You seem to highly disregard others theories without supporting your own. If you cannot support your theories with logical steps and substantial evidence, I see no reason to continue this argument for it is much like talking to a religious leader. Disregarding all logic to "believe" in their own, with no support for their theories other then disregarding others. Im sorry, this argument has no value in philosophy anymore, when logic seems to go away, and it fades into "belief".
"logical steps", is why you don't see the actual logical steps, because you live in an illogical society, based on illogical practices, called "literal". This Universe is not literal; it's metaphorical. That means the only way to truly understand it, is to escape from the distinctive illusions, and see the world via energy, vibration and frequency, not how we perceive it, because the world is anything but what we want it to be. It comes down to Allegory of the Cave; people play with shadows, making their own realities, unwilling to escape from their facades they had created unknowingly.

If you can't see how water is older than the planet itself. That the planet produces colorful arrays of electromagnetic waves like the human body. If you can see that the human eye has patterns akin to the Universe. That the photo receptors that capture our experience were formed prior to stars. That our lungs are based on plant design. That our heart is based on four stages of four different sea creatures. That our entire neuron system is based on the patterns in the Universe. That human life is existing upon these energies, and reacting, flowing according to these energies - that we are negative and positive because of the ions within us. That our emotions follow Newton's laws, because we are the Universe's atomic energies living a conscious experience in the end. Then you're blind - no buts, no questions.
I will tell you what I have told others. It is not true until argued to be true. You may very well be right, but until you can support your claims to others ( which is the point of this forum upon which you post). Then it holds no sway in philosophy let alone science. Logic is needed to sway others, not yourself. Upon which I will not comment or argue your beliefs, for I have no need to until you can put logic into it and they have a solid foundation. For it is not a theory or law but a belief, wherein I have no need to attempt to defeat it for it is not a threat.
-UriahHarris

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 22nd, 2014, 5:44 pm

Uriahharris wrote:
I will tell you what I have told others. It is not true until argued to be true. You may very well be right, but until you can support your claims to others ( which is the point of this forum upon which you post). Then it holds no sway in philosophy let alone science. Logic is needed to sway others, not yourself. Upon which I will not comment or argue your beliefs, for I have no need to until you can put logic into it and they have a solid foundation. For it is not a theory or law but a belief, wherein I have no need to attempt to defeat it for it is not a threat.
If it was a belief, such philosophies would not go any further than my heart.

Knowing that I have argued, and beat people to the punch every time, because I am working with what is blatantly the actual Universe and it's entire system of form and faculty, I can say that what I have in my head is not just in my head, but cross-referential to the entirety of this magnificent canvas of space and matter. I treated my ideas like children, and because of that, the Universe spoke to me because in order to become more than animal or Man, you have to take control over your entire collective consciousness; take it, compare it to the Universe, realize how small it is and then set yourself free from the constraints of focus points, which is what people don't do, nor do you. You base everything off of "logic", when 99% of the "logic" today, isn't even logic. Science isn't based on "logic", it's based on how things already "work" - there's a difference between "logic" and how things "work". To say something is logic, or that something is evidence, is absolutely absurd in a Universe that already points towards the right answers and conclusions when you, yourself, point yourself to the right direction - until you stop fooling yourself in a psychopathic society that doesn't even have healthy school systems, or degrees for geniuses, you will never understand how the Universe works, because you don't know how you work, or where to even begin.

While you look for "logic", I'll just keep breaking down the Universe and human mind for how it "works", via reverse-engineering, cross-referencing and self-similarity. I'll just wake up from my everyday and come up with incredible ideas based entirely on what I broke everything down to, because life is not about gaining knowledge - it's about reducing knowledge, to become the anti-anti-intellect. He who knows nothing, but uses a tool that knows everything.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Uriahharris » July 22nd, 2014, 10:16 pm

Subatomic God wrote:
Uriahharris wrote:
I will tell you what I have told others. It is not true until argued to be true. You may very well be right, but until you can support your claims to others ( which is the point of this forum upon which you post). Then it holds no sway in philosophy let alone science. Logic is needed to sway others, not yourself. Upon which I will not comment or argue your beliefs, for I have no need to until you can put logic into it and they have a solid foundation. For it is not a theory or law but a belief, wherein I have no need to attempt to defeat it for it is not a threat.
If it was a belief, such philosophies would not go any further than my heart.

Knowing that I have argued, and beat people to the punch every time, because I am working with what is blatantly the actual Universe and it's entire system of form and faculty, I can say that what I have in my head is not just in my head, but cross-referential to the entirety of this magnificent canvas of space and matter. I treated my ideas like children, and because of that, the Universe spoke to me because in order to become more than animal or Man, you have to take control over your entire collective consciousness; take it, compare it to the Universe, realize how small it is and then set yourself free from the constraints of focus points, which is what people don't do, nor do you. You base everything off of "logic", when 99% of the "logic" today, isn't even logic. Science isn't based on "logic", it's based on how things already "work" - there's a difference between "logic" and how things "work". To say something is logic, or that something is evidence, is absolutely absurd in a Universe that already points towards the right answers and conclusions when you, yourself, point yourself to the right direction - until you stop fooling yourself in a psychopathic society that doesn't even have healthy school systems, or degrees for geniuses, you will never understand how the Universe works, because you don't know how you work, or where to even begin.

While you look for "logic", I'll just keep breaking down the Universe and human mind for how it "works", via reverse-engineering, cross-referencing and self-similarity. I'll just wake up from my everyday and come up with incredible ideas based entirely on what I broke everything down to, because life is not about gaining knowledge - it's about reducing knowledge, to become the anti-anti-intellect. He who knows nothing, but uses a tool that knows everything.
You have just solidified my argument. I need not say more, thankyou for the pleasant "rant".
-UriahHarris

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 22nd, 2014, 10:19 pm

Uriahharris wrote:
You have just solidified my argument. I need not say more, thankyou for the pleasant "rant".
You've just rationalized your argument, and solidified mine.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Uriahharris » July 23rd, 2014, 12:20 am

Subatomic God wrote:
Uriahharris wrote:
You have just solidified my argument. I need not say more, thankyou for the pleasant "rant".
You've just rationalized your argument, and solidified mine.
It is not an argument without evidence, nor can it be philosophy without logic. I tire of this illogical back and forth posting, I end it here for the sake of time best spent elsewhere, you must be thinking the same I'm sure.
-UriahHarris

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 23rd, 2014, 12:33 am

Uriahharris wrote:
It is not an argument without evidence, nor can it be philosophy without logic. I tire of this illogical back and forth posting, I end it here for the sake of time best spent elsewhere, you must be thinking the same I'm sure.
Not at all. I lose nothing either way. If you have something to lose, then clearly you have always been wrong from square 1.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

User avatar
Uriahharris
Posts: 147
Joined: July 18th, 2014, 12:24 am

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Uriahharris » July 23rd, 2014, 12:39 pm

Subatomic God wrote:
Uriahharris wrote:
It is not an argument without evidence, nor can it be philosophy without logic. I tire of this illogical back and forth posting, I end it here for the sake of time best spent elsewhere, you must be thinking the same I'm sure.
Not at all. I lose nothing either way. If you have something to lose, then clearly you have always been wrong from square 1.
What makes you so crass? I have nothing to gain here, I wish I had something to lose, for in the losing of an argument one can buikd a better one, but this is not even a proper argument anymore, so I have no need for it. I did not come to this forum to spat off rants and beliefs so I am done.
-UriahHarris

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 23rd, 2014, 5:26 pm

Uriahharris wrote:
What makes you so crass? I have nothing to gain here, I wish I had something to lose, for in the losing of an argument one can buikd a better one, but this is not even a proper argument anymore, so I have no need for it. I did not come to this forum to spat off rants and beliefs so I am done.
People who don't know as much as they think, who make a game out of discussions and arguments, are people that have worlds to learn before they can discuss with types like me that breathe philosophy / ontology, that live for ideas more than food, luxury and desire, who have taken full control over every circumstance they possibly could within their human limits, from which they came into a stage of consciousness that is beyond Monster & Man.

You continue to say "logic", "rant", along with other descriptions you have merely typed up without a basis. This is begging the question, because you have no actual argument to display. You merely beg the question based on your limited senses, which is why everything we're discussing ends at your feelings, while it has no end for me or this Universe. The reason why you created a make-believe end, is because you do not want to accept your own short comings.

Anybody that argues this information like you do, lost the moment they thought logic and sense was built on begging and pleading, rather than breaking down information and progressing from one point to another.

Water is consciousness.

Fire is will.

A dying star is a psychopath.

Galaxies devouring other galaxies would be greed.

Black hole would be new life - insanity, when new life is not taken.

Birth of a galaxy would be our eyes.

Gravitational forces would be our ability to influence others and pull people in.

The process of a black hole's coming into new life, is the process of human experience.

Instead of begging the question - use your brain and argue each individual debate based on how everything works, not how your feelings tingle. I have already learned how to not choose what to think about and feel about - I let the whole Universe in.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

Wooden shoe
Posts: 1508
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 12:25 am
Location: Dryden ON Canada

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Wooden shoe » July 23rd, 2014, 8:24 pm

The ivory tower is a great place to think and study, however it is high off the ground, so is often a place where fantasies become real to the one in the tower, as a result of losing touch with reality.

Regards, John.
We experience today through the lens of all our yesterdays

User avatar
UniversalAlien
Posts: 1121
Joined: March 20th, 2012, 9:37 pm
Contact:

Re: What is Mind?

Post by UniversalAlien » July 23rd, 2014, 11:09 pm

Subatomic God wrote:
That's what happens to solipsists, when they get ruined by someone who knows how to escape useless questions like "how do you know that everything isn't just sensory?" - maybe it's because I was born from a fetus, I wouldn't want to be the father of all of this stupidity or ignorance, and I can tell that this entire Universe is external - independent, yet complimenting of my own experience.
Yes, and science must assume an independently existent universe BUT can we really know what that universe is independently of the human mind comprehending it? When I answer my own question and say ultimately all is mind and all that exists is a manifestation of mind, I would be including the internal comprehension as part of that universe, after all can you really prove anything exists without a mind to comprehend it? So while I agree with you that solipsism lacks validity, the question of what is the external universe is still up for debate - How significant is our comprehension of the universe {or reality]? - Could there be many worlds seen differently by other minds other than human?

User avatar
Subatomic God
Posts: 1494
Joined: October 15th, 2013, 11:09 pm

Re: What is Mind?

Post by Subatomic God » July 23rd, 2014, 11:47 pm

UniversalAlien wrote:
Yes, and science must assume an independently existent universe BUT can we really know what that universe is independently of the human mind comprehending it? When I answer my own question and say ultimately all is mind and all that exists is a manifestation of mind, I would be including the internal comprehension as part of that universe, after all can you really prove anything exists without a mind to comprehend it? So while I agree with you that solipsism lacks validity, the question of what is the external universe is still up for debate - How significant is our comprehension of the universe {or reality]? - Could there be many worlds seen differently by other minds other than human?
There's a pattern; design to the Universe that tells you everything you need to know.

Starting with the pattern which consists of our brain neurons forming in the same manner as the Universe's matter and energy. Therefore the Universe existed before the human mind - the human mind is based on the Universe, like a child; an individual state. They are not reliant - the photo receptors were created billions of years ago before human life; before stars. Unless you are saying that the human mind, is the Universe - you're wrong. There's evidence that everything is one - there's no evidence that supports the Universe being the mind's sensory field, when the Universe gave birth to the human mind.
What do you call a cat wearing a turtle's shell on its back? A purpoise.

Post Reply