Comments on: Consciousness Revisited http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/ Sat, 31 Jul 2010 08:09:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Gaura-Vijaya das http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2262 Gaura-Vijaya das Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:57:52 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2262 Here we also have a big museum that will be grander and more expensive. than any of the ISKCON vedic planetorium. Instead of literal S.B, they use the bible as a book of history and astronomy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3-Dvd27NQ&feature=related Here we also have a big museum that will be grander and more expensive. than any of the ISKCON vedic planetorium. Instead of literal S.B, they use the bible as a book of history and astronomy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3-Dvd27NQ&feature=related

]]> By: Gaura-Vijaya das http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2261 Gaura-Vijaya das Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:55:15 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2261 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3-Dvd27NQ&feature=related This is a good video on God gene and how faith in God may be gene determined. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS3-Dvd27NQ&feature=related
This is a good video on God gene and how faith in God may be gene determined.

]]> By: Karnamrita das http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2241 Karnamrita das Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:13:36 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2241 I actually found this a fascinating and stimulating article trying to make sense of philosophical questions that have confounded Western thinkers from a Vedantic, Yogic perspective. At least some Gaudiyas need knowledge of contemporary thinking and a way to address it in a language that is understandable to modern, thinking people. If we study the example of Shrila Prabhupada in discussing modern and ancient philosophers and perspectives, we see that if there was something he agreed with he would acknowledge it, while pointing out the differences. It is the quality of great thinkers and experiencers to be able to extract the "nectar" or essence without just condemning it wholesale--which closes the door to any type of meaningful dialog. I would say that generally it is easier to notice what we don't like or agree with. My point is that we don't have to agree with every point in something to see value in it. In my view, the attempt to explain consciousness in a contemporary, thoughtful way has value and should be done. If we can express the reality of consciousness better than the author, we should do so. I actually found this a fascinating and stimulating article trying to make sense of philosophical questions that have confounded Western thinkers from a Vedantic, Yogic perspective. At least some Gaudiyas need knowledge of contemporary thinking and a way to address it in a language that is understandable to modern, thinking people. If we study the example of Shrila Prabhupada in discussing modern and ancient philosophers and perspectives, we see that if there was something he agreed with he would acknowledge it, while pointing out the differences. It is the quality of great thinkers and experiencers to be able to extract the “nectar” or essence without just condemning it wholesale–which closes the door to any type of meaningful dialog. I would say that generally it is easier to notice what we don’t like or agree with. My point is that we don’t have to agree with every point in something to see value in it. In my view, the attempt to explain consciousness in a contemporary, thoughtful way has value and should be done. If we can express the reality of consciousness better than the author, we should do so.

]]> By: swami bv tripurari http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2240 swami bv tripurari Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:32:36 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2240 "The Mary Thought Experiment" conceived of by Jackson was latter refuted by Jackson as well, at least to his satisfaction. However, it remains a significant argument in philosophy and neuroscience today. To put it differently, there is a big difference between assessing damage and feeling hurt. The former can be accounted for within a strictly physical world view wherein everything is reduced to the physical or what we would call gross matter. However, the latter in the minds of many leaves us with an explanatory gap in terms of explaining the feeling, the experience and experiencer, in strictly physical terms. We of course posit subtle matter as the connection between the non physical atma and the world of its material experience. But it is an uphill battle to go in this direction. Thinkers are too much invested in Physicalism today. Empiricism is touted as the only real way of knowing even when this idea can not be empirically validated. Where is the objectivity? And no one is getting to far in terms of bridging the explanatory gap. It's is quite possible that they could meet with an impasse altogether. Articles like this one are interesting and informative, but they will not do much to turn the heads of Physicalists. But comparatively Western religion seems to have little to offer in this regard, having done away with subtle matter and with little or no explanation of the nature of consciousness. If anywhere outside of itself, science has looked therefore to Eastern mysticism. “The Mary Thought Experiment” conceived of by Jackson was latter refuted by Jackson as well, at least to his satisfaction. However, it remains a significant argument in philosophy and neuroscience today.

To put it differently, there is a big difference between assessing damage and feeling hurt. The former can be accounted for within a strictly physical world view wherein everything is reduced to the physical or what we would call gross matter. However, the latter in the minds of many leaves us with an explanatory gap in terms of explaining the feeling, the experience and experiencer, in strictly physical terms.

We of course posit subtle matter as the connection between the non physical atma and the world of its material experience. But it is an uphill battle to go in this direction. Thinkers are too much invested in Physicalism today. Empiricism is touted as the only real way of knowing even when this idea can not be empirically validated. Where is the objectivity? And no one is getting to far in terms of bridging the explanatory gap. It’s is quite possible that they could meet with an impasse altogether.

Articles like this one are interesting and informative, but they will not do much to turn the heads of Physicalists. But comparatively Western religion seems to have little to offer in this regard, having done away with subtle matter and with little or no explanation of the nature of consciousness. If anywhere outside of itself, science has looked therefore to Eastern mysticism.

]]> By: Gaura-Vijaya http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2239 Gaura-Vijaya Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:23:01 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2239 Yes I think we should all understand that we are worms in stool and nothing else! Yes I think we should all understand that we are worms in stool and nothing else!

]]> By: swami bv tripurari http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2236 swami bv tripurari Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:26:15 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2236 One aspect of Visnu-bhakti is its explanation of the nature of consciousness, what consciousness is and how it interacts with matter. There is Vedanta underlying bhakti. This article explains in brief the Vedanta of how consciousness and matter are related in this world and in doing so it posits that consciousness is non physical. It is a heady argument in neuroscience terminology for the idea that "You are not that body," an important point relevant to engaging in Hari-bhakti. One aspect of Visnu-bhakti is its explanation of the nature of consciousness, what consciousness is and how it interacts with matter. There is Vedanta underlying bhakti. This article explains in brief the Vedanta of how consciousness and matter are related in this world and in doing so it posits that consciousness is non physical. It is a heady argument in neuroscience terminology for the idea that “You are not that body,” an important point relevant to engaging in Hari-bhakti.

]]> By: Living Entity http://harmonist.us/2009/10/consciousness-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2234 Living Entity Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:11:20 +0000 http://harmonist.us/?p=2967#comment-2234 I didn't see anything about Dharma in all of this talk about consciousness. Without Dharma the jivas cannot make actual advancement in the development of higher consciousness. The Dharma of the jiva is Vishnu Bhakti, but there again no mention of Vishnu or Vishnu bhakti in all this talk about consciousness development. The world doesn't need another Hindu propagating another bogus yoga concept with a new spin on it. The world needs Vishnu Bhakti. I didn’t see anything about Dharma in all of this talk about consciousness. Without Dharma the jivas cannot make actual advancement in the development of higher consciousness. The Dharma of the jiva is Vishnu Bhakti, but there again no mention of Vishnu or Vishnu bhakti in all this talk about consciousness development.

The world doesn’t need another Hindu propagating another bogus yoga concept with a new spin on it.
The world needs Vishnu Bhakti.

]]>