Most discussions concerning the nature of consciousness avoid the essential question as to the source of consciousness. Does Man create consciousness or is Man a receiver of consciousness? If Man is the source of consciousness, he creates his own reality with the potential through unlimited knowledge, to experience reality. If Man is receiver of consciousness, he has the potential to remember what already exists but has been forgotten as Plato describes."My brain is only a receiver, in the Universe there is a core from which we obtain knowledge, strength and inspiration. I have not penetrated into the secrets of this core, but I know that it exists." —Nikola Tesla
I take the minority position that Man can remember the way back to the source rather than being the source. My gut feeling is that it is a minority position since it suggests a Source people define as a personal God and all the emotional objections associated with it. Yet avoiding it makes it impossible to discover the objective meaning and purpose of existence and organic life including Man within it.
Are there any members here who also begin with the idea that Man is a receiver of consciousness who could make discussion possible? Apparently this question is still debated but why debate when the option is open to discuss the implications of being a potential receiver of consciousness.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... -the-brain
If relative qualities of consciousness beginning with the eternal unchanging conscious source beyond the limits of time and space is the structure of our universe making it the "body of God" within the Source, is it possible that a person can consciously experience the objective purposes of their life processes within the body of God? Of course if Man is the source of consciousness, then he has no objective purpose and there is nothing but the battle over subjective interpretations.The prevailing consensus in neuroscience is that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain and its metabolism. When the brain dies, the mind and consciousness of the being to whom that brain belonged ceases to exist. In other words, without a brain, there can be no consciousness.
But according to the decades-long research of Dr. Peter Fenwick, a highly regarded neuropsychiatrist who has been studying the human brain, consciousness, and the phenomenon of near-death experience (NDE) for 50 years, this view is incorrect. Despite initially being highly incredulous of NDEs and related phenomena, Fenwick now believes his extensive research suggests that consciousness persists after death. In fact, Fenwick believes that consciousness actually exists independently and outside of the brain as an inherent property of the universe itself like dark matter and dark energy or gravity.
Hence, in Fenwick’s view, the brain does not create or produce consciousness; rather, it filters it. As odd as this idea might seem at first, there are some analogies that bring the concept into sharper focus. For example, the eye filters and interprets only a very small sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the ear registers only a narrow range of sonic frequencies. Similarly, according to Fenwick, the brain filters and perceives only a tiny part of the cosmos’ intrinsic “consciousness.”...................