What do you think happens after death?

[Kevbad the Bad]

We are empty selves.

Like Sainsbury's.

So what you're saying is that the existence of the universe can be explained by a shortage of HGV drivers. On the face of it that seems a bit bizarre, but I've never heard a better explanation.

 

[NoXion]

And you canr have space and time without consciousness. Whaf I mean by consciousness is Being.

The universe existed before there were conscious beings to perceive it.

 

[BigMoaner]

The universe existed before there were conscious beings to perceive it.

Consciousness as the universe, growing brains.

 

[NoXion]

Consciousness as the universe, growing brains.

Rewind the universe all the way back to the Big Bang to roll the dice again, and there's absolutely no guarantee that any kind of intelligence will arise out the resulting chaos, never mind anything we might recognise as human. The human brain is a marvellous and intriguing organ. But I see no good reason to assume that intelligence is the point of the universe. That strikes me as philosophically egotistical. Like a puddle assuming that the depression in the ground was specially made for it.

 

[BigMoaner]

Rewind the universe all the way back to the Big Bang to roll the dice again, and there's absolutely no guarantee that any kind of intelligence will arise out the resulting chaos, never mind anything we might recognise as human. The human brain is a marvellous and intriguing organ. But I see no good reason to assume that intelligence is the point of the universe. That strikes me as philosophically egotistical. Like a puddle assuming that the depression in the ground was specially made for it.

I agree with you entirely.

I haven't said there is a purpose behind anything, least of all us.

But as said earlier if you take the smallest particle, a quark, or whatever the fuck it is, we are trained, naturally, to miss always the context in which that particle exists, right? But it is that context which actually informs, and is, the objective world of objects, right down to ourselves, to our thoughts, our feelings. The two are not seperate.

It's plato's cave again, isn't it - the shadows on the wall - the objective world, of form and shape and space-time, is merely representations of the ground of being, Dasien, Being Itself, or whatever the name you want to employ. And that "whatever the fuck it is" cannot be known/grasped/understood/seen, but, unless we are somesort of Godly experiment implanted or thrown into the world, we are it. And if what ever the fuck it is, which is everything happening right now in the universe, has been there always, then how can anything enter into it, or leave it? If eternity and infinity exist, how can anything move through time and have shape? Because you would need to edges to the universe to have shape, and you would need to have a start point to have time?

The whole thing can disappear in a cloud of smoke therefore. It's the opposite of egotimism - for egotisim you would actually need seperate humans but I still, no matter how hard I've tried, can't seem to escape the conclusion that Being itself is one indivisable, ungraspable, unspeakable whole.

 

[BigMoaner]

i think perhaps i've shouldn't have used the word conciousness, which I use for the "whatever the fuck it is" which gives form to a formless (lol) universe.

 

[BigMoaner]

this bloke is really getting somewhere recently with this stuff. the east has been prattling on about this stuff for centuries.

Decoding Schopenhauer's Metaphysics: The key to understanding how it solves the hard problem of consciousness and the paradoxes of quantum mechanics: Amazon.co.uk: Bernardo Kastrup: 9781789044263: Books

Buy Decoding Schopenhauer's Metaphysics: The key to understanding how it solves the hard problem of consciousness and the paradoxes of quantum mechanics by Bernardo Kastrup (ISBN: 9781789044263) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.

www.amazon.co.uk

 

[BigMoaner]

the big lie, in my view, is that matter creates the brain and then brain creates conciousness, where actually it's the universe that creates brains. it's back to front. what you see and hear and touch out there is you. life creating life - but hang on, how can two things creating the same thing. yes, it's one thing. the more it changes the more it's the same thing.

 

[BigMoaner]

far out man.

i'm going back to ranting about covid wankers.

 

[NoXion]

the big lie, in my view, is that the brain creates conciousness, where actually it's the universe that creates brains. it's back to front. what you see and hear and touch out there is you.

Everything we know about brains and consciousness points towards the latter being an emergent chemical-physical phenomenon of the former. There is no evidence that consciousness exists without a brain of some kind to support it..

 

[BigMoaner]

Everything we know about brains and consciousness points towards the latter being an emergent chemical-physical phenomenon of the former. There is no evidence that consciousness exists without a brain of some kind to support it..

forget the word conciousness, replace it with "being itself."

being itself creating brains so being itself becomes concious. the brain is the universe exploring itself.

 

[BigMoaner]

because if it's not, then what is it?

 

[mojo pixy]

can't seem to escape the conclusion that Being itself is one indivisable, ungraspable, unspeakable whole.

You understand how large the universe is, right? And that what we can observe of it, isn't even all there is? Like, the extent of the observable universe is so vast that its size limit is [the speed of light] multiplied by [our current understanding of how old the universe is], so current working estimates are a diameter of at least 90,000,000,000 light years. (a light year ~5,878,625,370,000 miles so 90 billion of those) .. and inside all this, an uncountable number of galaxies, estimated at a minimum of billions, containing a number of stars so vast that it's easier to just say ''an infinite number''.

If so, please outline how all that is one indivisible whole? Without any woo or spiritualish handwaving, if poss.

because if it's not, then what is it?

Honestly, this is the most useful and important thing you've posted yet on this subject. An actual question
(I can't answer it either btw)

 

[BigMoaner]

You understand how large the universe is, right? And that what we can observe of it, isn't even all there is? Like, the extent of the observable universe is so vast that its size limit is [the speed of light] multiplied by [our current understanding of how old the universe is], so current working estimates are a diameter of at least 90,000,000,000 light years. An uncountable number of galaxies, estimated at a minimum of billions, containing a number of stars so vast that it's easier to just say ''an infinite number''.

If so, please outline how all that is one indivisible whole? Without any woo or spiritualish handwaving, if poss.



Honestly, this is the most useful and important thing you've posted yet on this subject. An actual question
(I can't answer it either btw)

how is it not an indivisable whole?

 

[BigMoaner]

i know fuck all about the universe, but I have yet to be convinced that humans are somehow seperate from it. if you can prove that to me, i'm all ears.

 

[BigMoaner]

nothing to do with woo. i think you underestimate the course of nondual thinking in most of western philosophy.

 

[mojo pixy]

how is it not an indivisable whole?

I asked first

(btw I'm not saying it's not ''one thing'' .. 'universe' kind of means that, etymologically .. I'm just taking issue with how relevant that is to a human life or our human understanding of life .. and death)

 

[NoXion]

forget the word conciousness, replace it with "being itself."

being itself creating brains so being itself becomes concious. the brain is the universe exploring itself.

I'm not sure what "being itself" means. I take it for granted that things exist. But not all things exist equally. Some are tangible and quantifiable, others are more fuzzy and abstract, but are just as real as any purely physical thing. There are atoms of iron, but none of justice. We have to create justice ourselves, the universe doesn't hand it to us.

how is it not an indivisable whole?

Because it clearly is divisible. On the scale at which quantum mechanical effects predominate, gravity is so weak that you can safely ignore it in calculations.

i know fuck all about the universe, but I have yet to be convinced that humans are somehow seperate from it. if you can prove that to me, i'm all ears.

Of course we're "connected" to the universe in the sense that we are in it and part of it, but that's a trivial observation.

 

[BigMoaner]

I asked first

I believe it is a whole because the context of which all this dead matter is floating. it's as simple as that. it's a simple conceptual jump. if you can explain to me how a particle is seperate from teh context in which exists, then as said I am all ears.

 

[weltweit]

What happens after death?

I stop paying rent is one thing, no more rent! Yay

 

[BigMoaner]

I'm not sure what "being itself" means. I take it for granted that things exist. But not all things exist equally. Some are tangible and quantifiable, others are more fuzzy and abstract, but are just as real as any purely physical thing. There are atoms of iron, but none of justice. We have to create justice ourselves, the universe doesn't hand it to us.




Because it clearly is divisible. On the scale at which quantum mechanical effects predominate, gravity is so weak that you can safely ignore it in calculations.



Of course we're "connected" to the universe in the sense that we are in it and part of it, but that's a trivial observation.

of course it's divisable with the conceptual apparatus we have when we look out - we need to seperate things into objects and have concepts of space and time to survive! i don't walk around thinking i am the universe, but i have yet to hear an argument that shows that I have been flung down into this world, as if built from outside and put into it. we are it. it's really not that controversial.

 

[Aladdin]

The universe existed before there were conscious beings to perceive it....(that we know of)

Ftfy

 

[BigMoaner]

Of course we're "connected" to the universe in the sense that we are in it and part of it, but that's a trivial observation.

not what i mean at all.

we are part of it and we are it at the same time. the one appearing as the many, and the many appearing as the one.

 

[BigMoaner]

I'm not sure what "being itself" means. I take it for granted that things exist. But not all things exist equally. Some are tangible and quantifiable, others are more fuzzy and abstract, but are just as real as any purely physical thing. There are atoms of iron, but none of justice. We have to create justice ourselves, the universe doesn't hand it to us.

back to that heidedgger quote again about thoughts coming to us, rather than us coming to thought.

i cannot predict what will come into my mind next. impossible. even wilful thoughts such as "i am going for a bath" come out of nowhere. there is no chooser of thought, there is just thought. just like i cannot stop my hair from growing grey, my knee getting better, and deciding how fast to beat my heart. it's happening by itself. there is no chooser of thought, no chooser of feeling. even "choosing type thoughts" come as they come, with no one picking or bringing them into awareness. for all i know i could get a pattern of thoughts wihtin the next five minutes to set fire to my house. my awareness, 100%, beyond any doubt I have, is happening by itself.

 

[BigMoaner]

how can matter create things like love, justice, the seeing of the colour blue, say? i am sure they play a role, but to me that just points to the idea that nothing can be reduced to mere matter.

 

[mojo pixy]

of course it's divisable with the conceptual apparatus we have when we look out - we need to seperate things into objects and have concepts of space and time to survive! i don't walk around thinking i am the universe, but i have yet to hear an argument that shows that I have been flung down into this world, as if built from outside and put into it. we are it. it's really not that controversial.

There's no ''outside'' the universe (as far as we know, and let's go with that for the purposes of this exchange). However, there is ''non-being'' (call that ''outside'' this universe if you wish?) We are currently ''being'' .. but before and after this state of ''being'' there is another state of ''non-being'' that arguably, most potentialities mainly belong to. I think ''flung down as if built from outside'' is a strange image and certainly not one I recognise as truth. We (that is each consciousness) emerge from physical matter, in ways we do not yet understand, and when our host-body dies, our consciousness evaporates - why, and to where, we do not yet know.

back to that heidedgger quote again about thoughts coming to us, rather than us coming to thought.

i cannot predict what will come into my mind next. impossible. evenwilful thoughts such as "i am going for a bath" come out of nowhere. there is no chooser of thought, there is just thought. just like i cannot stop my hair from growing grey, my knee getting better, and deciding how fast to beat my heart. it's happening by itself. there is no choose of thought, no chooser of feeling. even "choosing type thoughts" come as they come, with no one picking or bringing them into awareness. for all i know i could get a pattern of thoughts wihtin the next five minutes to set fire to my house. my awarness, 100%, beyond any doubt I have, is happening by itself.

Where does morality come into this then - if ''I'' am a mere conduit for the universe's expression of itself? Where do morals come from in all this happening by itself?

how can matter create things like love, justice, the seeing of the colour blue, say?

You're conflating stuff that doesn't need conflating. 'Colour' is light vibrating at a certain EM frequency. 'Love' is a chemical cocktail in the brain for the purposes of pair-bonding for better species continuation.

Justice is more useful. Where does it come from? (as where do morals come from?)

 

[BigMoaner]

I asked first

(btw I'm not saying it's not ''one thing'' .. 'universe' kind of means that, etymologically .. I'm just taking issue with how relevant that is to a human life or our human understanding of life .. and death)

Not much, in the end. But the whole conceptual game of subject and object can be seen through, briefly. It's actually humbling, rather than anything else. You now staring at the laptop - well to me that is "it" looking at "it". Subjectivity weakens. I feel most alone when cut off, divided. But then I remember what seeing actually is, what hearing is, and I get a glimpse of something beyond my understanding completley. It's not even that large of a conceptual step. But we are so trained, so conditioned to believe we are seperate selves (entirely understandable), when really I have never heard any convincing argument for it. I am not sure but I think Descartes has a lot to answer for - when he set out to prove the existance of the self, seperate and alone from the world.

 

[BigMoaner]

There's no ''outside'' the universe (as far as we know, and let's go with that for the purposes of this exchange). However, there is ''non-being'' (call that ''outside'' this universe if you wish?) We are currently ''being'' .. but before and after this state of ''being'' there is another state of ''non-being'' that arguably, most potentialities mainly belong to. I think ''flung down as if built from outside'' is a strange image and certainly not one I recognise as truth. We (that is each consciousness) emerge from physical matter, in ways we do not yet understand, and when our host-body dies, our consciousness evaporates - why, and to where, we do not yet know.



Where does morality come into this then - if ''I'' am a mere conduit for the universe's expression of itself? Where do morals come from in all this happening by itself?

If there is no outside, how can anything enter it?

Morals - likely from evolutionary processes - but I am not an expert in that.

If you can prove to me that I know what thought will come into my mind next, however, I am all ears.

 

[BigMoaner]

as for throwness into the world. it is your position that humans are seperate from the universe, no?

so if they are, how and why? which would for me lead to sense of being thrown or put into the world. of course there is no "outside" but if we are seperate, then suddenly there is us and the universe, right? so there is sense - stress on the "sense" - of being placed, or put, or "started off..." at some point.

in my view - what is the big bang? This! You! Now!

 

[BigMoaner]

as for birth and death. old arthur on the buddhist shit.