--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" <composent...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > <no_reply@> wrote: > > [snip] > > There's a certain kind of mysteryunsolved and > > probably insolublethat has a seductive > > attraction for me. > [/snip] > > Yes, very interesting article. Thanks.
And thank you for following it up with a "post about ideas." I think that the author would like that. > "Mysterian" - I like that. > > - "What are you?" > > - "Advaitan Tibetan Triple-Buddhist Yogi with well- > developed lower absortions. You?" > > - "Me? Oh I am a mysterian". > > Yes - that'll do nicely! Absolutely. I think I'll start using it in exactly those situations. It really captures things better than "Anarcho-Tantric Buddhist," which I've used to fill in the "Religion" blank on another forum. :-) Plus, it suggest things that the other description does not. Hearing "Anarcho-Tantric Buddhist," one might be led to think that I *believe* in either anarchy, tantrism, or Buddhism. I do not. I *like* aspects of each of these things, and find much of value in them. But the bottom line is that pretty much the only thing I really believe in the essential Mystery of it all. > The problem of consciousness is sooo difficult > to think about. Like lighting a match in the dark > to "see" the dark... > > The article refers to the philosopher Nagel. Nagel I > think gets it down clearly for me in his piece "What > Is It Like To Be A Bat". > > http://www.jstor.org/pss/2183914 > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Nagel > > It goes something like this as I recall (but best to > read the original!): > > Consider these two propositions: > > 1) There is such a thing as a bat (true) > 2) There is such a thing as "being a bat" (true?) > > Quite simple if put that way. Belief in the truth > of(2) is belief in consciousness. Hard core > scientific materialism is in great difficulty > over (2) - unless, as some would argue, all > statements such as (2) are in fact false. Absolutely fascinating analysis. I *love* it, because it gets down to essentials, to the things that we assume as givens. Most people would assume (2) to be true such that they would never question its truth. But is it? > I don't think there IS such a thing as "being my > computer" (and never will be I suspect). If there is, mine must be quite bored with me by now. :-) > I DO think there is such a thing as "being Barry" I'm leaning in that direction myself. > ...although I can't possibly claim certainty for that > belief. Maybe I CAN claim certainty for "there is such > a thing as "being Me" - a bit of Descartes' "Cogito" > there... Or at the very least the *perception* that there is such a thing as 'being You.' > I don't think the Turing test helps. Barry may look > and act in a way that is indistinguishable from a > regular human being - Some here would disagree even with that. :-) > ...but the question of whether > there IS such a thing as "being Barry" is a fact about > the world (either true or false) regardless of whether > or not anyone can possibly tell. And yet so much of spiritual and religious belief is based on the idea that one can not only "possibly tell," but be *certain* about such things. Just today we've had a post suggesting that the question of consciousness can be resolved by simply having the right subjective experiences. I think that if pressed, you would find many on this forum who would admit to believing that they consider that which they exper- ience subjectively to be "true." But is it? Or is it merely Just Another Subjective Experience? Could the experience of enlightenment -- and one's view of what constitutes reality and Truth from the *standpoint* of enlightenment -- be Just Another Subjective Experience? Much of spiritual practice and religion is predicated on a "No" answer to those last two questions above. They envision the world as a series of hierarchical truths, the highest of which is enlightenment. Anything per- ceived from that level *must*, in their view, be equivalent to Truth. I don't believe this. I think that the view from enlightenment is Just Another Subjective Experience. And I'll continue thinking this even if someone enlightened claims to know for sure that there is such a thing as "being Barry." :-) :-) :-)
