We've Moved! Visit our NEW FORUM to join the latest discussions. This is an archive of our previous conversations...

You can find the login page for the old forum here.
CHATPRIVACYDONATELOGINREGISTER
DMT-Nexus
FAQWIKIHEALTH & SAFETYARTATTITUDEACTIVE TOPICS
123NEXT»
James Kent: The Great Consciousness Swindle: Why Philosophers Will Never Find Consciousness Options
 
fourthripley
#1 Posted : 5/28/2013 9:24:19 PM
DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 465
Joined: 18-Jan-2008
Last visit: 31-Dec-2024
acceler8or.com/2012/11/the-great-consciousness-swindle-why-philosophers-will-never-find-consciousness-and-why-they-secretly-dont-want-to


As someone who writes regularly on aspects of the brain and consciousness, I have recently received a large amount of correspondence from people wondering what I think about a news article linking consciousness to quantum gravity in cellular microtubules, and how this model could offer “proof” of the soul’s ability to survive outside the body through some kind of nonlocal quantum hocus-pocus.[1] Even though this theory is presented purely as an exercise in theoretical mathematics, because it was suggested by Roger Penrose, a lauded and respected mathematician and philosopher, many people have jumped to the conclusion that this theory is not only correct, but that it somehow “proves” that consciousness is eternal, immutable, and can travel in and out of the body like a soul. My personal take on the theory is that it is garbage disguised as science, and not only is it wrong, it perpetuates a myth of consciousness that philosophers have been using to mislead gullible believers for centuries.

What is the myth of consciousness that Penrose is perpetuating? The central myth of this theory is that consciousness is a “thing”, and that consciousness “exists” in some “place” that we can’t see. I call this the “invisible mind” model of consciousness, and the invisible mind model basically says, “Consciousness is so ineffable and mysterious that no material description is sufficient to define its boundaries. Therefore, we must assume that consciousness is an immaterial or ‘phantom’ presence we can’t locate or measure, trapped somewhere inside the organic machinery of the body.” This model is also known as Dualism, which claims that in addition to the material body there is also an immaterial “mind”, “spirit”, or “soul” that inhabits the host. The greatest feature of Dualism, as far as I can tell, is that Dualism claims the mind and spirit are immaterial and invisible, and therefore can never be accurately measured or described. And here is where the great swindle takes place. If I can convince you that something invisible exists, like an “invisible mind”, but I also say it is immaterial and can never be measured, then I have just made myself an expert in something that does not actually exist, but also cannot be disproven. In academia this is called “philosophy”, but in laymans terms this is called “bullshit”. I do not have a degree in philosophy, but I have a PhD in bullshit, and I can always smell it a mile away, and this theory of consciousness smells like bullshit to me.

The great Consciousness swindle, and the myth that Penrose and his ilk keep perpetuating, is the assumption that “Consciousness,” with a capital C, is so complex and mysterious that stupid blind neuroscientists can never explain it all with their crude, classical, materialistic descriptions. This, of course, is a complete intellectual fallacy. Scientists who study the brain understand that “consciousness,” with a lowercase c, is not a “thing” with a “location”, but is instead the abstract process of being self-aware, or a relative measurement of general self-awareness. When you talk about consciousness with a lowercase c, then it becomes easy to see that consciousness is not mysterious at all, it is a description of our everyday waking life. For humans, consciousness comes online when we wake up and goes through peaks and valleys throughout the day. Consciousness gets hungry, tired, bored, excited, aroused, irritated, distracted, and so on, until we go back to sleep and consciousness disappears and we become “unconscious”. Then consciousness comes back online in a very limited “secure test environment” for a few seconds at a time while we dream, then it disappears again. And when we wake up the cycle resets and consciousness starts a new day. The system of consciousness is mediated by many areas and functions of the brain, and when one area of the brain is damaged the area of consciousness mediated by that area of the brain is also damaged. Consciousness is material, it is a material thing that relies on material neurons and material fuel and material stimulus to work correctly. We only think it is invisible because it is inside the head, but having looked in a few heads I can tell you for a fact it is not invisible in there. There is actual stuff happening in the brain as it twitches with activity, and that stuff is consciousness.

This materialistic description of consciousness simple, it is testable, you can see it in action. It is not mysterious and ineffable, it is functional and it works. How do we know this is the correct description of consciousness? When something goes wrong with your ability to think, do you go to a philosopher to tell you that your Consciousness is mysterious and invisible and cannot be measured? Does it help if he tells you that Consciousness is a function of quantum gravity in microtubules, or that your consciousness is a fundamental force of the universe that predates life? What if your doctor tells you that Consciousness flows through you like air or water, or that everything is Consciousness? Does that help you fix your brain to think better and manage your daily life? No, that doesn’t help at all, that is just some smoke blown up your ass by fake gurus who want to sell books. When you really have a problem with your consciousness you don’t go see a philosopher, you go see a neuroscientist who can diagnose you and fix the problem, because the neuroscientist generally understands how the brain works. The philosopher only understands bullshit about invisible minds, and that bullshit may be fascinating, but it will never fix your brain or help you understand how consciousness actually works.

So why the swindle? What is going on here? Why would someone want to convince you, me, and everyone in the world that an invisible mind exists? The obvious answer, to me, is that it is an easy way to sell books and publish papers without doing any actual research, because the thing that “Consciousness” researchers claim to be experts on is conveniently invisible. But beyond that, why would so many people willingly accept this non-description of invisible mind as “truth” when it is clearly a shell game far beyond the level of rational testability? I think the swindle reduces itself to the fact that humans have an inflated view of themselves, and also tend to invent invisible forces to explain things they don’t understand. Consciousness with a capital C is one of these mythical invisible forces that makes humans feel special about themselves, and if you claim to be an “expert” in this invisible force you never have to do any research or produce any results. But once Consciousness with a capital C is defined as a crude biological process that can be measured in waves of self-awareness that fluctuate throughout the day, all the philosophers who rely on Consciousness being a mystical primal force of the universe are out of work. They need to go back to talking about the soul or invent another invisible force to chase, because as of this article, the Big C Consciousness racket is officially over. I am calling bullshit on anyone who steps into this field from now on.

How do I know that the Consciousness swindle is a racket, for sure? What is my proof? In the logical deconstruction of the Dualistic definition of the variable [Consciousness] : “[Consciousness] is a mysterious metaphysical force that animates matter, and all animated matter is imbued with [Consciousness]”. Now take this same definition and substitute the words “God”, “demon”, “magic”, “spirit”, or “soul” in the place of Consciousness and see if the argument of the invisible mind changes. It does not. Let’s go back to the Penrose conjecture and say, “The mysterious force of [Consciousness] is mediated by quantum gravity in microtubules.” Now substitute the word Consciousness with the array of alternatives I described above. Does the argument change? No. Now substitute the words “hyperdimensional alien telepathy” or “quantum spirit beetles” or “psychoplasm” or “morphic field” or “subatomic pink elephant semen” for “Consciousness”. Now substitute all those words when talking about an invisible mind hidden in the body, or an invisible penetrating force that informs all organism-level intelligence. Does the Dualistic argument change one bit when we change the essential word of the argument to gibberish? The argument does not change. That is because if you are arguing for the existence of something immaterial that is invisible and cannot be measured, you have not really defined what you are looking for, and can insert literally any nonsense word or concept into the argument and it is the same fundamental argument. This is the core of the Consciousness swindle, and you can tell it is the same old swindle because the word “consciousness” can be substituted for “God” or “soul” and it still means, “Something I claim is mysterious and invisible that cannot be measured that only I understand.” To me, this is the classical definition of bullshit.

When it comes to “consciousness” there is a lot of bullshit out there, and when bullshit comes from a respected scientist or MD and is picked up by the media, it is sometimes hard to tell how badly the bullshit smells. But when it comes to “theories of consciousness,” the proof is in the neuroscience. Modern neuroscience has neatly defined all the major brain functions and primary locations of the functions that mediate consciousness. Most of the “mystery” of consciousness has been taken out of the “consciousness is mysterious” argument. So if any argument begins with the presumption that consciousness is “mysterious” or that consciousness “has not been properly located or defined,” then that is immediately a bullshit theory. Any theory of consciousness that begins with the “mystery” assumption is not really looking for “consciousness”, it is looking for the invisible mind, or a God, or a soul, or is looking for a way to sell books to people who do not understand the brain. Philosophers would rather believe “consciousness” is a “mysterious animating force” because it sounds cooler that way and it gives them something interesting to bullshit about. And for the people who buy into these theories of invisible mind, they are always happy to believe in mysterious invisible forces until something goes wrong with their own mind, and then they go running to a psychotherapist or a neurosurgeon like Sanjay Gupta fix their “consciousness” like it was a car engine to be tweaked and tuned. That’s because consciousness is like the humming of a car engine, and a good neuroscientist can diagnose operational issues of the mind just by testing and measuring. Neuroscience can’t fix all problems with consciousness, but it can fix many of them, and it can measure and diagnose almost all of them, which is way more than any trendy quantum theory of consciousness can ever hope to achieve. Because this is the simple truth: Any theory that purports to understand consciousness, but does not support the crude operational model of self-awareness built on a substrate of neural spikes in a synaptic neural network, is bullshit. Because the consciousness built on neural spikes in a synaptic network is our everyday consciousness. It can be modeled, measured, diagnosed, operated on, tested, damaged, and corrected. The other definition of Consciousness, with a big C, does not meet these tests, and does not help anybody understand anything at all. And what does that smell like to me? You guessed it.
mistakes were made
 

Good quality Syrian rue (Peganum harmala) for an incredible price!
 
joedirt
#2 Posted : 5/28/2013 10:46:16 PM

Not I

Senior Member

Posts: 2007
Joined: 30-Aug-2010
Last visit: 23-Sep-2019
Quote:
. But when it comes to “theories of consciousness,” the proof is in the neuroscience. Modern neuroscience has neatly defined all the major brain functions and primary locations of the functions that mediate consciousness. Most of the “mystery” of consciousness has been taken out of the “consciousness is mysterious” argument.


HAHAHAHA. LOL

You do realize that every single current hypothesis of materialism based consciousness can also be explained with the brain as a receiver of consciousness right?

Consider this simple case:

Depression causes decreased serotonin levels.
Decreased serotonin levels cause depression.

Both of those statements are likely true.

Seems to me the obvious answer is that the brain is both a receiver and a generator of consciousness. Consider the fact that your brain is receiving my stream of consciousness as you read this. Even in a materialistic sense it's both a generator and a receiver.

BTW Neurochemistry rocks.
It's easily my favorite branch of chemistry.
But it in know way is the 'proof' of anything related to consciousness.

Neurochemistry and neurophysiology at best fit machine measured data points on physical based models.
It may be that neurochemistry is eventually able to explain most physical things related to consciousness, but it won't ever come close to proving or modeling thoughts, visions, dreams, hopes, desires....the content

I say in the realm of consciousness subjective experience is EVERYTHING.

BTW I agree that the idea of linking consciousness to quantum gravity in cellular microtubules is absurd. Perhaps it will someday be expanded into something that is related and has some concept of actuality behind it, but for now it's like saying there is an invisible field of purple unicorns that represent our everlasting souls....could be. But not likely.

Peace.
If your religion, faith, devotion, or self proclaimed spirituality is not directly leading to an increase in kindness, empathy, compassion and tolerance for others then you have been misled.
 
universecannon
#3 Posted : 5/28/2013 11:02:51 PM



Moderator | Skills: harmalas, melatonin, trip advice, lucid dreaming

Posts: 5257
Joined: 29-Jul-2009
Last visit: 24-Aug-2024
Location: 🌊
I stopped reading/listening to anything James Kent had to say when he said DMT is no more interesting or amazing than the fact that we see things when we rub our hands against our eyes to hard...along with countless other ridiculous claims. When it comes to dmt/consciousness he doesn't seem to have a clue IMO



<Ringworm>hehehe, it's all fun and games till someone loses an "I"
 
gibran2
#4 Posted : 5/29/2013 3:15:41 AM

DMT-Nexus member

Salvia divinorum expertSenior Member

Posts: 3335
Joined: 04-Mar-2010
Last visit: 08-Mar-2024
It's only through consciousness – consciousness and nothing else – that those who deny the primacy of consciousness are able to formulate their denials!

No one has ever directly experienced the material world. It simply isn’t possible. We have conscious experiences that lead some to conclude there is indeed a material world, but there is no evidence that such a place exists!

I agree that primacy of consciousness proponents’ explanations for consciousness involving microtubules and quantum mechanics and other scientific-sounding terms are almost certainly incorrect. But it’s equally true that the strict materialist view – the view that an independent physical world exists independent of observers and that consciousness mysteriously “arises” out of unconscious interacting particles is also likely incorrect. There is no proof that either belief is correct.

There is nothing we can ever learn or discover, scientifically or otherwise, that will prove an independent physical world exists.

~~~
Imagine that you have lived your entire life in a sealed chamber. There are numerous video monitors and joysticks in your chamber allowing you to see and to a degree interact with what’s outside. Without leaving your chamber, can you prove that what you see on the monitors exists outside and independent of your chamber? Can you even prove that there is an “outside”?
~~~

The problem with many materialists is that they don’t realize their most fundamental assertions are beliefs and not facts.

Here is an impossible task:

Prove that physical reality exists outside of consciousness.
gibran2 is a fictional character. Any resemblance to anyone living or dead is purely coincidental.
 
Parshvik Chintan
#5 Posted : 5/29/2013 3:33:43 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 3207
Joined: 19-Jul-2011
Last visit: 02-Jan-2023
fourthripley wrote:
When you talk about consciousness with a lowercase c, then it becomes easy to see that consciousness is not mysterious at all, it is a description of our everyday waking life.

everyday waking life = totally non mysterious. you would be a fool to think otherwise.

gibran hit the nail on the head.
My wind instrument is the bong
CHANGA IN THE BONGA!
 
Nathanial.Dread
#6 Posted : 5/29/2013 5:45:18 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 2151
Joined: 23-Nov-2012
Last visit: 07-Mar-2017
I higly recommend you try reading the works of Douglas Hofstader, specifically Godel, Escher, Back and I Am A Strange Loop.
Both of these provide really interesting analysis of consciousness approached from the direction of information theory and algorithms, instead of pure neuroscience or pure philosophy.

Hofstader is a big research into artificial intelligence and a proponent of strong-AI.
"There are many paths up the same mountain."

 
Hiyo Quicksilver
#7 Posted : 5/29/2013 9:47:02 AM

just some guy


Posts: 564
Joined: 13-Dec-2011
Last visit: 23-Mar-2019
Location: The Rocinante
I guess I'll toss my vote into this recommended reading list...

Daniel Dennet (a well-versed philosopher and cognitive scientist) has a keen knack for reducing these issues to mere trivialities. He is a "devout" atheist, so his views may challenge those more aligned with a dualistic or vitalistic system of understanding... but I find beautiful elegance in the way his writing brings everything together, matters of taste aside. A lot of points seem to echo between his work and the opening post, and having just finished Kinds of Minds, it struck me as worth a mention. Whether as a point of view worthy of consideration or as a good grey-matter workout, it certainly is an engaging, informative and good-humored read.
 
joedirt
#8 Posted : 5/29/2013 12:03:38 PM

Not I

Senior Member

Posts: 2007
Joined: 30-Aug-2010
Last visit: 23-Sep-2019
gibran2 wrote:

~~~
Imagine that you have lived your entire life in a sealed chamber. There are numerous video monitors and joysticks in your chamber allowing you to see and to a degree interact with what’s outside. Without leaving your chamber, can you prove that what you see on the monitors exists outside and independent of your chamber? Can you even prove that there is an “outside”?
~~~


I know where you are coming from. I think the strict materialist in some capacity thinks there is a man in the box so to speak as if somewhere deep inside there is an unchanging part of us that is in control. A controller/operator if you will.

Ultimately though there is no such controller.
There is no man in a room with camera's.
My sense organs don't feed data to an independent controller.

There is no part of me that is separate from the universe.
I'd make the same basic challenge to anyone that the Buddha made 2500 years ago.
Can you show me a self? I took that challenge at face value and I have yet to find one.
I haven't found it in neurochemistry, neurobiology, or meditation.

What I have observed is a process. An apparently never ending, and most likely
a never beginning process of which I am just a small...VERY SMALL part of.

Quick thought. Perhaps it's not never ending and never beginning.
Perhaps it is ever beginning? After all time is a relative illusion.

Peace.
If your religion, faith, devotion, or self proclaimed spirituality is not directly leading to an increase in kindness, empathy, compassion and tolerance for others then you have been misled.
 
cyb
#9 Posted : 5/29/2013 12:12:58 PM

DMT-Nexus member

Moderator | Skills: Digi-Art, DTP, Optical tester, Mechanic, CarpenterSenior Member | Skills: Digi-Art, DTP, Optical tester, Mechanic, Carpenter

Posts: 3574
Joined: 18-Apr-2012
Last visit: 05-Feb-2024

Joe
Have you seen this series?
You may find it interesting.
Thumbs up
Please do not PM tek related questions
Reserve the right to change your mind at any given moment.
 
nexalizer
#10 Posted : 5/29/2013 12:16:03 PM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 788
Joined: 18-Nov-2011
Last visit: 24-Sep-2024
Seems obvious to me that the fact that there are correlations between conscious states and material brain states does not prove that consciousness is material.

If indeed it is something else and manifests here through the brain, then one would expect the material parts of the brain to be involved. The old TV analogy.


Now I don't necessarily have a strong belief either way, but to say that because when we do X in part Y of the brain Z happens to conscious awareness thus consciousness is purely a physical phenomenon, that to me seems to be the fallacy.
This is the time to really find out who you are and enjoy every moment you have. Take advantage of it.
 
Global
#11 Posted : 5/29/2013 12:24:35 PM

DMT-Nexus member

Moderator | Skills: Music, LSDMT, Egyptian Visions, DMT: Energetic/Holographic Phenomena, Integration, Trip Reports

Posts: 5267
Joined: 01-Jul-2010
Last visit: 13-Dec-2018
James Kent wrote:

We only think it is invisible because it is inside the head, but having looked in a few heads I can tell you for a fact it is not invisible in there. There is actual stuff happening in the brain as it twitches with activity, and that stuff is consciousness.


It's all well and good that neurological activity correlates with experiences in consciousness, but correlation does not prove causation or do you and the materialist neurologists conveniently forget that one when you "logically" conclude that you must be correct?

I'm sure there are physical components inside my television set that buzz and vibrate with activity that ends up producing the video/audio display, and furthermore that if I were to physically damage one of those inner physical structures that it would modulate the signal and produce distortions and artifacts in the video and audio fields, and that even if you had some kind of scanning devices to monitor the correlating inner electrical activity to the modified video/audio display, none of this would make one correct in assuming that it is the television that is generating the signal and the content of the programming. It is most clearly received in this case from a foreign source (a signal that couldn't be measured until recently). This is not to say that the materialists might not be right anyway, but it is to say that it is foolhardy to assume that you must be correct in your assumptions. You don't stand on as logically solid ground as you like to delude yourself into believing you do.
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - Albert Einstein

"The Mighty One appears, the horizon shines. Atum appears on the smell of his censing, the Sunshine- god has risen in the sky, the Mansion of the pyramidion is in joy and all its inmates are assembled, a voice calls out within the shrine, shouting reverberates around the Netherworld." - Egyptian Book of the Dead

"Man fears time, but time fears the Pyramids" - 9th century Arab proverb
 
joedirt
#12 Posted : 5/29/2013 12:26:59 PM

Not I

Senior Member

Posts: 2007
Joined: 30-Aug-2010
Last visit: 23-Sep-2019
cyb wrote:

Joe
Have you seen this series?
You may find it interesting.
Thumbs up



Thanks for the link cyb!

I already startred watching it!
I already see one difference between him and I.

I think it's awareness that is fundamental and not consciousness.
I say this simply because I can observe (be aware of) my consciousness.

Everything is however aware in greater or lessor degrees.

BUT I think it's just a different way of defining the terms consciousness/awareness
I'l watch the rest of the series before any more comments.

Thanks again for the link.

Joe
If your religion, faith, devotion, or self proclaimed spirituality is not directly leading to an increase in kindness, empathy, compassion and tolerance for others then you have been misled.
 
joedirt
#13 Posted : 5/29/2013 12:48:55 PM

Not I

Senior Member

Posts: 2007
Joined: 30-Aug-2010
Last visit: 23-Sep-2019
Quick update for cyb on the video.
First one was awesome and yes his definition of consciousness is my definition of awareness, meaning I fully agree with his take on this. I love the way he has broken it down to such a fine degree.

I can't wait to watch the rest of the series...alas for now it's time to get some work don.

Thanks again.
If your religion, faith, devotion, or self proclaimed spirituality is not directly leading to an increase in kindness, empathy, compassion and tolerance for others then you have been misled.
 
DeMenTed
#14 Posted : 5/29/2013 2:35:26 PM

Barry


Posts: 1740
Joined: 10-Jan-2010
Last visit: 05-Mar-2014
Location: Inside the Higgs Boson
gibran2 wrote:

Here is an impossible task:

Prove that physical reality exists outside of consciousness.


Theres lot's of ways to do that. Dinosaur bones is one example. They were lying in the ground long before human consioussness was around. Or are dinosaurs an invention of human consioussness?
 
3rdI
#15 Posted : 5/29/2013 3:25:19 PM

veni, vidi, spici


Posts: 3642
Joined: 05-Aug-2011
Last visit: 22-Sep-2017
I don't think that humans "invented" consciousness, it "invented" us just like it "invented" dinosaurs and sausages.
INHALE, SURVIVE, ADAPT

it's all in your mind, but what's your mind???

fool of the year

 
DeMenTed
#16 Posted : 5/29/2013 3:46:04 PM

Barry


Posts: 1740
Joined: 10-Jan-2010
Last visit: 05-Mar-2014
Location: Inside the Higgs Boson
3rdI wrote:
I don't think that humans "invented" consciousness, it "invented" us just like it "invented" dinosaurs and sausages.


Interesting Smile. So consciousness is God then? Humans have a wild imagination lol
 
3rdI
#17 Posted : 5/29/2013 3:47:54 PM

veni, vidi, spici


Posts: 3642
Joined: 05-Aug-2011
Last visit: 22-Sep-2017
I don't like the term God, for me it brings up the big guy on a cloud vibe.

I think consciousness/awareness is everything and everything is awareness/consciousness think I
INHALE, SURVIVE, ADAPT

it's all in your mind, but what's your mind???

fool of the year

 
Global
#18 Posted : 5/29/2013 3:57:45 PM

DMT-Nexus member

Moderator | Skills: Music, LSDMT, Egyptian Visions, DMT: Energetic/Holographic Phenomena, Integration, Trip Reports

Posts: 5267
Joined: 01-Jul-2010
Last visit: 13-Dec-2018
DeMenTed wrote:
gibran2 wrote:

Here is an impossible task:

Prove that physical reality exists outside of consciousness.


Theres lot's of ways to do that. Dinosaur bones is one example. They were lying in the ground long before human consioussness was around. Or are dinosaurs an invention of human consioussness?


Gibran didn't say anything about human consciousness in particular. It is an assumption you've made. Dinosaurs are presumably beings who were aware to some degree themselves. In a primacy of consciousness scenario, these dinosaurs would simply be receiving the same consciousness signal as we do, albeit modulating and processing it much differently I would imagine due to their different receivers (brains).
"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind" - Albert Einstein

"The Mighty One appears, the horizon shines. Atum appears on the smell of his censing, the Sunshine- god has risen in the sky, the Mansion of the pyramidion is in joy and all its inmates are assembled, a voice calls out within the shrine, shouting reverberates around the Netherworld." - Egyptian Book of the Dead

"Man fears time, but time fears the Pyramids" - 9th century Arab proverb
 
DeMenTed
#19 Posted : 5/29/2013 4:00:18 PM

Barry


Posts: 1740
Joined: 10-Jan-2010
Last visit: 05-Mar-2014
Location: Inside the Higgs Boson
Yes but we weren't aware of dinosaurs until 65 million years after they lived. So is consciousness a cosmic thing that connects all things that have ever lived or is it a self awareness thing? Are sausages consciouss? Razz
 
DeMenTed
#20 Posted : 5/29/2013 4:02:06 PM

Barry


Posts: 1740
Joined: 10-Jan-2010
Last visit: 05-Mar-2014
Location: Inside the Higgs Boson
Global wrote:
DeMenTed wrote:
gibran2 wrote:

Here is an impossible task:

Prove that physical reality exists outside of consciousness.


Theres lot's of ways to do that. Dinosaur bones is one example. They were lying in the ground long before human consioussness was around. Or are dinosaurs an invention of human consioussness?


Gibran didn't say anything about human consciousness in particular. It is an assumption you've made. Dinosaurs are presumably beings who were aware to some degree themselves. In a primacy of consciousness scenario, these dinosaurs would simply be receiving the same consciousness signal as we do, albeit modulating and processing it much differently I would imagine due to their different receivers (brains).


Doesn't the fact that we found the remains of these dinosaurs whether they were consciouss or not proof of a physical reality?
 
123NEXT»
 
Users browsing this forum
Guest (8)

DMT-Nexus theme created by The Traveler
This page was generated in 0.073 seconds.