Why Materialism Is Baloney

What is a human being? What is life? Can science give us reliable answers to such questions? The electricity of life. The meaning of human consciousness. Are we alone? Are the traditional contests between science and religion still relevant? Does the word "spirit" still hold meaning today?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Why Materialism Is Baloney

Unread postby Solar » Sat Aug 09, 2014 4:17 am

moses wrote:Well not a physical body that we usually think of. I have recently been considering this on a Krishnamurti forum where I write. Experiencing is separate from but attached to brain neurons. Experiencing is non-physical but what about the connector between experiencing and the neuron. It stands to reason that in the properties of this connector lies the properties of the body that survives death.


It is correct that Consciousness is not "a physical body that we usually think of". Consciousness is not a 'body' at all as relates the form of a physical body. The word “physical” is a referent to that which is a different expression of Consciousness - Its polar expression known as “Matter”. However, there is a distinct difference between Matter as relates the Hermetic Philosophy and the “matter” of physics. The former (Matter) alludes to a differentiation in Consciousness whereas the later (matter) is anyone’s guess as to what physics is trying to say as it is only able to detect a bevy of associated localized qualities which reveals no tangible ‘object’ at the foci of said “Forces”. Therefore, one has statistical probabilities of ‘where’ a particular quanta may be located as opposed an actual ‘item’, ‘object’, or ‘thing’ existing at a specific location.

From the perspective of Ancient Philosophy Matter is a differentiation in Consciousness. The ability of differentiating is recognized in physics as the process of “phase-transition” but physics interprets this as a lifeless process. However, the physics, or materialism, is incapable of recognizing Matter as a differentiated phase of Consciousness just as some, as offered, are incapable of recognizing “…the non-physical source of life in animals and plants”.

moses wrote:Memory could be due to a connection between past experiencing and some brain neuron. Thus the memories would be beyond the brain and so available to the dead. But we also need the communication between neurons to have a corresponding communication in the connectors. This will enable the dead to think, etc. But we come to a difficulty when it comes to the dead being able to see, and sense generally.


Memory is not related to "brain neurons". Memory is an aspect of the experiences of Non-Local Consciousness which, it needs to be reasoned, owing to its Continuance beyond the laying aside of the physical body, necessarily indicates that Consciousness precedes the localized manifestation of a physical body. There exist no "difficulty" in the abilities of Non-Local Consciousness with regard to Vision, Will, Thought, Communication and/or any other faculty normally associated with being unique to physical existence. All faculties have their impetus and existence in Consciousness before being made manifest in a physical body. These attributes are the physical manifestation of attributes of Non-Local Consciousness; not the other way around. Those who have passed on do not look through a glass as darkly as many of those still in physical manifestation. The situation is quite the opposite.

moses wrote:How does the dead see it's old body below. It is the blocking of unwanted or random light that allows us to see. It also makes us very visible, something that the dead do not appear to be. So for the dead to see the connector material they must have a way of sensing some wavelengths of light. But then why would we not be able to see in total darkness with this sensing. Well there is actually evidence that we can, but it is not immediate or automatic.


No, its not "electromagnetic", these are the secondary effects once the body is enlivened by emanations of The Non-Local Consciousness. The nature of That of which the Non-Local Consciousness partakes of has been rejected in the physics of materialism and scientism. The term "second sight" exist for a reason but it is not "wavelengths of light" that are "blocked". Yes, we can see in total darkness but the nature of these talents, now latent, are far removed from understanding owing to the rejection of so very much. Meet Eşref Armağan, a painter born without eyes who with one touch, and having never actually 'seen' anything physical masterfully bridged a 600 year old development in the world of Art; Perspective:

Eşref Armağan

moses wrote:So there is the outline of there being some body that is in synch with our crude physical bodies, which can think and sense and use our memories. So all that changes when we die is our sensing apparatus changes, but our memories remain, along with the repression of the bad memories, we hope. And that appears to be the problem. Repression will break down in the dead eventually.


Yes, there is the "outline", the more ephemeral "double" as portrayed; which has the 'milky' color of the light of the "Hunters Moon". Many have seen their very own as well as that of others and even this 'body form' dissolves as Non-Local Consciousness progresses in Continuance. No, it is not "physical" nor does it meet with the qualifications of "matter" in the physics but this is the only relation to the multiplicity of differentiations in Consciousness that the scientific minded has owing to the rejection of what has been offered. Memory is of the Non-Local Consciousness. Experiences gained while in physical manifestation are assessed by The Non-Local Consciousness as to whether or not those experiences meet with the The Ideal, The Purpose for which the Non-Local Consciousness decided to manifest long before actual physical birth occurs. The essence of those potencies which do not meet with The Ideal are 'remolded', or 'reformed' until as such time that The Entity seeks to make those essences One with The Ideal, or Purpose.


moses wrote:Self-reflection as thinking does require some form of physicality. Experiencing does not require any form of physicality.


No, it does not. Self-reflection requires differentiation of The Self. One does not experience them self as 'individualized', one does not have experience of 'I', until there is that which appears as not-Self. So we find ourselves seeming to exist within 'Something' (The Universe) that appears experentially different and 'exterior' to our self. Those terms ("physical" and MIND or the self-reflecting Consciousness) are the only way that we relate to differentiations of Consciousness. Physics doesn't know what Matter is; neither does it know what Consciousness is. It only 'sees' polarity between and this causes a dichotomy of interpretation and perspective. The same thing occurs with the "particle wave duality". Polarity is not a 'one or the other' relationship. It is the dual nature of ONE Unity within itself as opposed to that.

The change is not in the nature of a transmutation of one thing into another thing entirely different-but is merely a change of degree in the same things, a vastly important difference. - Kybalion: POLARITY


Matter (Hermetic) is an aspect of Consciousness and despite the advice that Maya is illusion we're still not understanding the implications of that advice. Therefore, with regard to Purpose (denied by materialism as an aspect of existence), an aspect of Purpose is to recognize that the 'Inner' Self is of the same scope as the 'externalized' Universe within which we find ourselves or, That within which we "move and have our being". No one knows enough about the "matter" of physics to say what it is and/or how it relates to Consciousness since the physics doesn't seem to understand either. When differentiating, the condition can only be temporary as Consciousness must periodically reunite with The Font of Its Being which is inherent within that Consciousness.

moses wrote:So the self in any form is physical, whereas experiencing is not. Experiencing is the real life, whereas words are just physical symbols.

Cheers,
Mo


The Self in any 'form' is differentiated from The Whole! It is this experiential Knowledge and Understanding which The Entity is trying to regain. Therefore, Samādhi, the ability to experentially conjoin with The Whole from whence The Entity has its Origin as an actual individualized 'part' of That very Whole.

All is in Consciousness and Consciousness is in All
"Our laws of force tend to be applied in the Newtonian sense in that for every action there is an equal reaction, and yet, in the real world, where many-body gravitational effects or electrodynamic actions prevail, we do not have every action paired with an equal reaction." — Harold Aspden
User avatar
Solar
 
Posts: 1338
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am

Re: Why Materialism Is Baloney

Unread postby moses » Sat Aug 09, 2014 6:48 am

Memory is not related to "brain neurons". Solar
That is like saying experiencing is not associated with brain neurons.

All faculties have their impetus and existence in Consciousness before being made manifest in a physical body. Solar
All seeing and hearing, etc, only exist in experiencing (=consciousness), but the sensing mechanism that produces impulses is beyond experiencing. And the sensing mechanism of the body that survives death must be different to that of the crude physical body. Thus different things are sensed but the experiencing need be of no different quality.

Experiences gained while in physical manifestation are assessed by The Non-Local Consciousness as to whether or not those experiences meet with the The Ideal, The Purpose for which the Non-Local Consciousness decided to manifest long before actual physical birth occurs. Solar
There is learning in experiencing. That is the purpose. There is no need to make a doctrine out of it, even if that doctrine is extremely ancient.

Therefore, Samādhi, the ability to experentially conjoin with The Whole from whence The Entity has its Origin as an actual individualized 'part' of That very Whole. Solar
Experiencing can expand to be the experiencing of others, of nature, of planets and galaxies.

Cheers,
Mo
moses
 
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Adelaide

Previous

Return to The Human Question

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest