Hi EH. Can you provide some more information for me to read on this. It has always seemed to me that, without consciousness, nothing can exist i.e. if there is no consciousness to experience a 'thing' then it isn't there.

Personally, I have enough challenges learning how to live and love and flourish in the universe I find myself in. Some people like to engage in this kind of speculation, but, to paraphrase Yehoshuah, "Sufficient unto the Universe is the trouble thereof. So do not worry about the multiverse."

__________________
Grassaf, Eolas

Well, that philosophy is called "Idealism," that is, the view that reality consists exclusively of minds and their ideas. This was very clearly articulated by George Berkley, Bishop of Cloyne. The link points to a good article on him and his ideas/works in the Stanford Encylopedia of Philosophy.

Berkley's arguments are very good, probably better than many of those who sought to refute him ("I refute it thus," said Samuel Johnson, vigorously kicking a large stone.) Yet, there have been many subsequent philosophers, among them certainly Bertrand Russell (others include Immanuel Kant, Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsch, G. E. Moore, A.C. Ewing, David Stove, John Searle, Alan Musgrave, Philip J. Neujahr) who also refute Idealism.

I can highly recommend Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy" as one source of insight, as it is written for a general audience rather than for technical philosophers. If you want more technical, then try Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason," and in particular the section called "Refutation of Idealism." You can get an overview on Wikipedia under Idealism or Materialism.

Now, you will not be surprised to learn that I am of the materialist school of thought. I believe that matter came first, and that consciousness is what mind does, and mind is a function of brain, and brain is material. Everything that I know, everything that science has been able to reliably demonstrate, is that when brain is out of order, consciousness does not happen. The very tiny number of reported exceptions (NDEs and OBEs) have so far been unsupported by good evidence, and in any case are too rare given how many humans there are, how many opportunities each human has, and how few are actually reported.

You can read Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy" for free online. Chapter IV is the one on Idealism.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

From expereince I only know that if I have no thought...my mind is completley silence...the world (things, body) disappear...yet I remain. I don't know what I am that remains, other then I know I exist.

Can I truly say I am conscious or unconscious, if I am neither?

The statement that all things appear in consciousness...includes the unconscious. Here I see that your question is valid...does it cease to exist when I am unconscious about it. No...even those things that I am unconscios about...exist within consciousness. It's more like seeing consciousness as a field of all possibilities which goes along the lines of quote:" If your mind is empty, it is always ready for anything; it is open to everything. In the beginner’s mind there are many possibilities, in the expert’s mind there are few.- SUZUKI-ROSHI

But I am not unconscious ...nor conscious in the absence of all thought.

I see all suffering within consciousness (that which I am is conscious and/or unconscious of).

Why would I doubt that this is "real" if I have found my very being to be it...in the absence of all concepts?

Can you truly say without a doubt in your mind...there is no God/Self? You can say I don't believe there is one....you can say it makes no sence...it is not logical....but can you truly leave all your concepts behind and say to yourself: "I don't exist"?

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

Sorry, but if you know that you exist, then you are conscious of that fact, at least.

But I seriously doubt whether absolute, complete emptiness is even remotely possible. After all, there must exist the consciousness that emerging from the meditative state is required, or you would never leave. You must be conscious of sounds around you, or no sound would rouse you from your reverie. Try to stay in that state for a very long time, and see if your conscious mind doesn't become aware, as needed, when you need to pee, or grow hungry.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

I think it's possible there could be different dimensions that are in the same space and sometimes intersect or collide.. I think theoretically these dimensions have been suggested. We are all passing through time and space and there are many possibilities I think.

__________________
"it benefits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God."
- Johannes Kepler

There is a difference between awareness and consciousness. Consciousness to me is simply the ability to perceive...not that which is perceived (conscious) nor that which is not perceived (unconscious). Awareness is that which IS....God/Self.

Or as Sri Nisargadatta Mahahraj explains:
Awareness is primordial; it is the original state, beginningless,endless, uncaused, unsupported, without parts, without change. Consciousness is on contact, a reflection against a surface, a state of duality. There can be no consciousness without awareness, but there can be awareness without consciousness, as in deep slepp. Awareness is absolute, consciousness is relative to it's content; consciousness is alwasy of something. Consciousness is partial and changeful, awareness is total, changeless, calm and silent. And it is the common matrix of every experience.

__________________
May your awareness be perfection

evangelicalhumanist Quote:


So then what is the purpose, the function?
Just a random bunch of chemicals accidentally organizing into higher forms to do what?
The materialist point of view is so pointless as it is devoid of purpose and meaningful function.

As we all know form follows function, so then what is the function which our form follows?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which is like saying that when the rely tower is down you will get no cell service, but this does not disprove the existence of satellites or wireless communication.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
metis

As to the multiverse idea, it makes for good sci-fi stories but has no relevancy to real life as we still cannot figure out how to live together. Let's get that part straight and then we can tackle such ephemeral notions. How many "gods" is like the "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" debates.

Thanks for the links EH. It seems to me that there are two schools of thought on this and, from what I can see, neither position is able to refute the other with any obvious success.

If I were to declare that I imagined the accuracy of my position (no 'things' without consciousness) to be 50%, would you say the same for yours?

No, I'm afraid I could not. You see, when I had my last surgery, I was rendered 100% unconcious by the anesthesioligst. And yet, everyone I knew continued to be aware of the world, and their lives went on as usual, even though I was unconcious of them.

But why don't you play a little game. Imagine for yourself, if you can, whether this conversation is happening because I'm conscious of it, and therefore creating what you are typing, or because you are concious of it, and are therefore creating what I am typing. How far shall we regress? How many other people, who neither of us have ever heard of, are concious of things that neither you nor I know exist? How many things exist that neither you nor I, nor anyone else, is conscious of?

Now, of course, you could ascribe all of that to the consciousness of God, but then, I'd have to ask you to consider what it might mean for you to suddenly be aware of the infinitely regressing loop that is God, knowing you and knowing that you know God knowing you knowing.....

There is no reasonable way to make any of that work, in my view. The only reason to even try is the forlorn hope that, even if there's nothing left, there will still be that consciousness that you have now. That's the origin of religious belief, or at least a great part of it.

But if you have really read all of the material that those links lead you to, I think you will find that, on balance, the idealists have really lost the philosophical battle. Doesn't prove who's right, of course, but the weight of opinion is that reality exists, and we are conscious of it -- not the other way round.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.