[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 16 KB, 267x274, cupacoffee.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3331857 No.3331857 [Reply] [Original]

"All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves."

What does /sci/ think of this?

>> No.3331865

I think LSD is awesome.

>> No.3331871

It's true.

>> No.3331876

>no such thing as death
That's just bullshit. Death is an explicitly defined and empirically observed phenomenon.

It's like saying there's no such thing as motion. Sure, maybe you have some theory of the how the universe REALLY works that makes motion an illusion, but really, saying there's no death is just the same kind of sophistry. Death exists. You would have to say that death is *misunderstood*.

>> No.3331890

I think somebody is confusing the mental abstracts we use to understand the world with some kind of platonic truth.

>> No.3331901

I think that I'm reminded of being an embarassing teenager listening to tool, thanks for that.

>> No.3331904

>>3331857

D'awww, that's cute.

Let's make this thread a sticky.

>> No.3331908

>>3331857
I think you should find better quotes

>> No.3331909

>>3331857

Let's make this thread a sticky.

>> No.3331922

now where is Tom with the weather?

>> No.3331923

OP, in other words, you are saying that consciousness is an emergent trait of the whole universe and due to the vastness of the universe, we are the product of condensed areas of rogue, subjective, consciousness within it?

2 things
You have to know what consciousness is and prove not only that the physics of the universe cab exhibit them at an extensive scale but that individual forms of consciousness can arise (maybe akin to multiple personality disorder?)

>> No.3331934
File: 141 KB, 425x282, meditation.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3331934

"There is no dualism in the world of light ... One must realize that what is never mentioned is that if one moves at the speed of light there is no time whatsoever. There is an experience of time zero."

"Our world is in crisis because of the absence of consciousness. And so to whatever degree any one of us, can bring back a small piece of the picture and contribute it to the building to the new paradigm, then we participate in the redemption of the human spirit, and that after all is what it's really all about."

"We have been to the moon, we have charted the depths of the ocean and the heart of the atom, but we have a fear of looking inward to ourselves because we sense that is where all the contradictions flow together."

"We don't really understand what consciousness is at the really deep levels."

"The world which we perceive is a tiny fraction of the world which we can perceive, which is a tiny fraction of the perceivable world..."

>> No.3331940
File: 162 KB, 1152x864, Planet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3331940

"We have numerous, extremely naïve assumptions built into our thinking, and our most venerable explanatory engines, such as science, happen also to be our oldest explanatory engines, and therefore they have built into them the most naïve and unexamined assumptions."

"Who is to say what is real and what is not? "Real" is a distinction of a naïve mind, I think. We're getting beyond that."

"Nature is not simply the random flight of atoms through electromagnetic fields. Nature is not the empty, despiritualized lumpen matter that we inherit from modern physics. But it is instead a kind of intelligence, a kind of mind."

>> No.3331947

ITT: New-age mysticism pretending to be rational and progressive

>> No.3331952

>>3331947
ITT: indoctrinated /sci/entists denying their arrogance

>> No.3331961

>>3331952
Calling a spade a spade is not arrogance.

>> No.3331979

>>3331961
Living inside a box, everything outside of it is "fake",
is indeed arrogance.

>> No.3331999

>>3331979
My box is defined to include everything that is real. If you can show me that something is real, it is accepted.

>> No.3332003

>>3331999
Real being defined by fuzzy logic

>> No.3332004

>>3331979

If it isn't real, it's irrelevant.

>> No.3332010

>>3331999
Define reality.
Is it everything we perceive with our 5 senses?

What is not to say we operate in a mere frequency range?

Truly arrogant. Also doesn't explain NDE and OBE.

Must be one dull life putting bars around your brain,
limitting yourself in everything, thinking the world is black/white.

>> No.3332015

>>3332003

Let's hear your definition of "Real" then.

>> No.3332018
File: 717 KB, 1024x768, justlol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3332018

real deep bro, put that on your facebook status

>> No.3332019

>>3332010
Anything that can be experienced in any fashion, however indirect.

Even if there is something completely causally disconnected from any possible experience, does it matter?

>> No.3332020

It's already be proven realms and other dimensions exist,
therefore science is obsolete and only hinders human progress and advancement into understanding life.

Science has become a religious dogma, it's cancer.

>> No.3332027

>>3332015
Anything that affects reality, obviously.

>> No.3332032

>>3331979

You box includes everything, then?

Those things determined by science, as well as those things that science determines to be impossible, that are incompatible with an understanding of science?

>> No.3332039

>>3332019

Are my dreams real in precisely the same way as my house is real? Or do they differ in some quality?

>> No.3332037

fucking sage this crap and report

>> No.3332038

ITT: People who think science does not include all reality as its area of study

Really, guys? Oh wait, trolling. Carry on.

>> No.3332054

>>3332010

If we can't detect it in any way, shape or form, it has the same result as if it wasn't there.

Thus it's irrelevant.

>> No.3332055

>>3332032
But hold on bro, I do not limit myself by putting myself in a box and letting some "tool" i.e Science religiously dictate to me what is real and what is not.

I think outside of the box and will not mindlessly "accept" or "deny" anything, just observe and experience.

>> No.3332064

Science, explain near-death-experiences.

>> No.3332065

>>3332055

You seem to be under the assumption that the box is static...

>> No.3332071

>>3332055

You do not mindlessly accept or deny anything, but do you have some epistemology to accept or deny anything? Or do you accept all, or deny all, or remain aloof when it comes to acceptance and denial?

Everybody has a box, and that box is never identical to the set of things that are really, really real.

>> No.3332078

>>3332055
>I think outside of the box and will not mindlessly "accept" or "deny" anything, just observe and experience.
Refusing to think is not noble, despite the value of avoiding the anchoring effect of being stuck to one's current or initial beliefs.

>> No.3332087

ITT: People who should really listen to more Tool.

God dammit.

>> No.3332088

>>3332039
Dreams are real. We can experience them personally, and observe them directly in others, especially with tools like fMRI.

Supposing that what you seem to PERCEIVE when dreaming represents a physically EXTERNAL reality is a mistake however.

tl;dr the nuerochemistry in dreaming is real, what you perceive as a result is illusory

>> No.3332089

Blindly accepting science is no worse than blindly accepting religion.

Don't get me wrong, science has been a great too for human advancement, but it should NOT be the dictating tool where everything else becomes "false".

>> No.3332103

>>3332088

So you have some method for distinguishing between things that are really real, and those that only seem realistic.

>> No.3332105
File: 23 KB, 565x546, 1284811950748.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3332105

>>3332089

You have no idea how the scientific method works, do you?

>> No.3332109

>>3332089
You are conflating the methods of rational inquiry and the content of current scientific theories. Scientists readily acknowledge that current theories are not Truth - but that does not mean they should abandon rational inquiry and empirical testing.

>> No.3332113

>>3332087
Care to elaborate?

>> No.3332123

>>3332103
Me? No, I'm not that conceited.

WE have methods for doing so, yes. Avoiding biases due to personal subjective perception is absolutely critical in research. Ultimately, we seek the ideas that best predict and represent reality as it really as, as revealed by experiment.

If there is a reality that cannot be experienced, then it isn't OUR reality.

>> No.3332146

>>3332123

So how do you tell what is real or not? You outsource it to someone else?

>> No.3332147

>>3332020
What alternative would you recommend?

>> No.3332154

>>3332146
Getting third-party confirmation of your experimental results is the main tool, yes.

Ultimately, if we all agree on what we actually see, then that's what we've got. We invent new and better tools for seeing, sure, but ultimately reality is what we see when we look. The problem of perception is fundamental, but we can work on minimizing the gap.

>> No.3332160

>>3332154

Okay, so we're both scientists then. I think we may have been arguing at cross-purposes.

>> No.3332166

>>3332113

The quote in the OP is the intro to 'Third Eye' by Tool....

...and if the OP had extended back a bit he would have got the bit that said: "Today a young man on acid realised..." IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY

>> No.3332182

>>3332160
Probably. Which fits nicely into the discussion of reality vs. perception of reality.

>> No.3332198

>>3332182

>reality vs. perception of reality.

They are the same thing. This thread is stupid.

>> No.3332212

>>3332198
No, now you're just abusing terms.

The common idea is that there is an objective reality, independent of our perception, and that our perception of it is only ever an approximation.

Do you disagreee?

>> No.3332235

>>3332198
Spoiler: Truth and reality aren't the same thing

>> No.3332274

>>3332064
Brain function in a largely anaerobic environment causes near death experiences. Fighter pilots in a centrifuge get them too, or when pulling high G maneuvers. Standing up fast and blowing on your thumb will cause it too, try it. Out of body experiences are unknown as to why exactly they occur, but can be caused by stimulating the fissure between the parietal and temporal lobe, implying it is a result of mismatched stimuli lobe communication.

>> No.3332332

Not reading whole thread but, ponder this: if our entire perception of reality is nothing but our own imagination, from where do we attain knowledge? Do our minds already hold an infinite repository of information that is relayed to us to coincide with our imagination of perceiving it? And if so, by what process is this information drip-fed to us, so to speak? What prevents us from accessing it anyway?

Oh and there is no doubt that in a solipsist view we must have this infinite knowledge, since there is nothing beyond our own mind.

>> No.3332389
File: 56 KB, 735x500, comic2-638.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3332389

>>3332332
> if our entire perception of reality is nothing but our own imagination, from where do we attain knowledge?
From objective reality, thus refuting the premise. Yay!

>> No.3332469

>>3332389

Wahoo! Solipsism done then.Sorry Philosophers, you can go home.