|
Post by Heron on Apr 3, 2011 21:35:12 GMT -1
He makes some good points about the experience of change as something outside oneself and the effects of subjectivity on our perceptions, but he ignores the fact that the experience of death and change are very potent and real and he seems to be arguing that if the hard question of consciousness can't be answered, then we cannot be conscious entities, experiencing the inner and outer qualia of our lives in a meaningful sense, which clearly isn't the case. He also refers to forgotten memories as contributing to his feel of identity, which is a bit of an oxymoron and his point about the return of memory after structural damage to the brain is a sweeping generalisation. It does raise some interesting questions though. I don't think he meant to convey a sense of subjectivity in our perceptions so much as a sense of the absolute nature of the First Person and the absolute nature of the present moment both of which he asserted are eternal. His argument was that, Just as I am not the same person I was twenty years ago neither am I the same person 'I' was two hundred years ago or two million years ago. But 'I' will always be. This, I think, implies the animate nature of all matter such as I discussed in the thread on Galen Strawson's theory of pan-psychism a while back. But it also says something about the Land of the Dead, implying that it is, in fact, the Land of the Living.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Apr 4, 2011 6:23:47 GMT -1
I don't think he meant to convey a sense of subjectivity in our perceptions so much as a sense of the absolute nature of the First Person and the absolute nature of the present moment both of which he asserted are eternal. His argument was that, Just as I am not the same person I was twenty years ago neither am I the same person 'I' was two hundred years ago or two million years ago. But 'I' will always be. Of course modern physics now see the the question of "now" as a series of snapshots, much like a roll of cinematic film, with the general consensus that "normal" time is constructed of a round 20 frames per second being processed by the brain. And much like a film projector, if the brain alters that processing speed, then our perception of time alters, more frames, the slower the perception of time, less frames, times speeds up. Using this hypotheisis results in the realization that the "I" is present in both past, present and future and this thing called time, is responsible for animation in the specific direction we experience it in normal reality. This, I think, implies the animate nature of all matter such as I discussed in the thread on Galen Strawson's theory of pan-psychism a while back. But it also says something about the Land of the Dead, implying that it is, in fact, the Land of the Living. It also presents us with the suggestion that the land of the dead shares some common conditions of existence with us, but not all of them, thus my using the "half way house" term. The fact that it is viewed as a somewhat negative place is, I think, nothing but a perception promoted by some other religions in an effort to promote self interest. If this place contains the necessary conditions for sustenance of some form of life, I fail to see why this would necessarily have to be viewed in a negative way and says more about humanities insecurities than the actual reality of the nature of such a place. RR
|
|
|
Post by potia on Apr 4, 2011 11:25:08 GMT -1
So it seems that the idea of the Land of the Dead as a constructed place the living can interact with the dead and not necessarily a place where the dead actually reside is something others connect with.
And from posts in this thread and the cosmology one the idea of descent from this place to that one is important.
I think we agree that it isn't a negative place as well.
So as it's a constructed place each of us will experience it in different ways but we may also be able to develop some shared steps in the journey to it or features that will be important to us as a group.
Does that seem reasonable?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 4, 2011 11:46:36 GMT -1
I think descent is important. from 'shamanic' type of journeying - not something i have done in a while - i have a 'map', a familiar landscape where i always begin. i guess a kind of spirit departure lounge. to get to the underworld i would always go into a lake that was there. this notion of downwards is always important. i think we seem to have a consensus about the place even if it's exact nature isnt less well defined for us, we have a good, broad idea of what it is and where it is. a good start
|
|
|
Post by nellie on Apr 4, 2011 18:03:21 GMT -1
I've been thinking about this today and have just caught up with the posts.
I strongly agree that the land of the dead is far more a half way house as was said. I remembered last night a dream I had when I was a teenager: I dreamt of my great-grandad. I was standing on something like a rope brindge over a grey ocean. At the other end of the bridge was a tall tower and I knew this is where my grandad had come from. He told me where my ancestors (in his line of the famil) originated, and in the last few months I've found out this was true. It was one of THOSE dreams. I mention it because towers/high places were mentioned before as a suggestion that the departed dead might have to travel up in comparison with our journey down to this inbetween realm. Is this an experience many of us share?
|
|
|
Post by nellie on Apr 4, 2011 18:05:45 GMT -1
I half remember something about thermodynamics (but don't profess to understand thermodynamics) - energy is never lost merely changed. Makes sense.
RedRaven, your thoughts sound like this is how somebody might become an ancestor?
|
|
|
Post by Heron on Apr 4, 2011 21:54:00 GMT -1
If we are going to say that we are reaching consensus on this - and I'm not sure that we are - then perhaps it's worth being a bit more specific about things I have already pointed to.
So, two questions:
If the Pan-Psychist /Animist view that all matter is conscious holds, so that consciousness doesn't die but lives on in the world in whatever form, then what inhabits the Land of the Dead?
If any theory of reincarnation holds (even one that says we might be redistributed in the world as a number of different beings), then what inhabits the Land of the Dead?
If the answer is something like "that special thing that each of us call 'me' ", is that the 'me' that existed at the point of death, and if so what of the ten year old or the thirty year old 'me' who might be different people? Where do they go?
I would suggest that any theory of mediation between ourselves and the ancestors needs to meet those questions head-on.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Apr 5, 2011 8:07:22 GMT -1
If the Pan-Psychist /Animist view that all matter is conscious holds, so that consciousness doesn't die but lives on in the world in whatever form, then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? I would classify myself as Animist, but that isn't my view... my view would better be expressed by suggesting that consciousness is a fundamental condition (pre-existing the matter/space/energy distinctions), but emerges in unique forms from relationships. Consciousness as expressed is relational. As quanta relates to quanta, person to person, atom to atom, cell to cell, consciousness emerges from a universal bedrock in all its unique forms... there is no experience of consciousness without relationship. But then I realise I might be slightly mad, because I would be happy for my understanding to be limited... and say I don't know... I am happy to think of the Land of The Dead as populated by conscious stories one day and living shades the next... just as I am with the Land of The Living. And just sit and say, at the end of the day, I don't really know. I just know that I relate to my Ancestors in very real and living interaction every day of my life and create mystery shaped stories around that.
|
|
|
Post by potia on Apr 5, 2011 9:29:58 GMT -1
If we are going to say that we are reaching consensus on this - and I'm not sure that we are - then perhaps it's worth being a bit more specific about things I have already pointed to. So, two questions: If the Pan-Psychist /Animist view that all matter is conscious holds, so that consciousness doesn't die but lives on in the world in whatever form, then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? If the Land of the Dead is a constructed meeting place does there have to be anything that actually lives there beyond those spirits or conciousnesses that have somehow chosen to live there? If any theory of reincarnation holds (even one that says we might be redistributed in the world as a number of different beings), then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? In the case of some sort of reincarnation there may still be a place for beings to rest a while in a Land of the Dead before reincarnating. It may also be that some souls for various reasons may choose or be given the choice of remaining there. If the answer is something like "that special thing that each of us call 'me' ", is that the 'me' that existed at the point of death, and if so what of the ten year old or the thirty year old 'me' who might be different people? Where do they go? I would suggest that any theory of mediation between ourselves and the ancestors needs to meet those questions head-on. We may not be able to agree fully even among our small group as to what inhabits a realm of the dead. I'm also not sure that we need to agree on what lives there if we have in common that it is a place we can go where we can interact in some way with whatever it is that the dead are to us. Does it really make a difference how we define the dead as long as we can develop relationships with them? I can't define what my dead grandmother is to me in terms of spirit or conciousness, physically she's a rotting corpse in the ground. It doesn't matter how I define her, what matters is that I still have a relationship with her, her story perhaps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2011 10:20:49 GMT -1
I agree, I'm not sure it's possible to reach an objective decision on what does live there as we don't really have any information on that.
Just to throw one more IED into the thread, when we visit the ancestors, can we be sure that we're visiting them in real time and not at a point in time when they were alive? With regards to far removed ancestors, I've always wondered whether the landscape is that of long ago, or simply of another place and I've never been able to answer that. Has anyone else experienced anything that can cast light on that aspect of our interaction with them?
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Apr 5, 2011 10:38:36 GMT -1
Just to throw one more IED into the thread, when we visit the ancestors, can we be sure that we're visiting them in real time and not at a point in time when they were alive? With regards to far removed ancestors, I've always wondered whether the landscape is that of long ago, or simply of another place and I've never been able to answer that. Has anyone else experienced anything that can cast light on that aspect of our interaction with them? Read this on a blog recently, which made a lot of sense to me hengruh.livejournal.com/138224.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2011 15:09:38 GMT -1
That makes sense ... I wonder what determines the landscape that we experience. If we have no knowledge of a place, it can't be constructed by our own minds. Maybe the ancestors construct the landscape to serve their needs (access to/from our world or preservation of a place sacred to them)?
|
|
|
Post by Heron on Apr 5, 2011 20:06:14 GMT -1
If the Pan-Psychist /Animist view that all matter is conscious holds, so that consciousness doesn't die but lives on in the world in whatever form, then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? I would classify myself as Animist, but that isn't my view... my view would better be expressed by suggesting that consciousness is a fundamental condition (pre-existing the matter/space/energy distinctions), but emerges in unique forms from relationships. Consciousness as expressed is relational. As quanta relates to quanta, person to person, atom to atom, cell to cell, consciousness emerges from a universal bedrock in all its unique forms... there is no experience of consciousness without relationship. But then I realise I might be slightly mad, because I would be happy for my understanding to be limited... and say I don't know... I am happy to think of the Land of The Dead as populated by conscious stories one day and living shades the next... just as I am with the Land of The Living. And just sit and say, at the end of the day, I don't really know. I just know that I relate to my Ancestors in very real and living interaction every day of my life and create mystery shaped stories around that. If consciousness is a pre-existing potential, then it must be inherent in all matter, so while actual consciousness 'dies' - i.e. the relational experience of a complex being - the bits of consciousness must carry on, and have been around for ever. So, in this view, the Ancestors are all around us. But, of course, their complex being as ancestors has passed on leaving behind many things for us to inherit. It is these things we can hallow and 'place' in a Land of the Dead. In doing so we institute the relationship which, as you suggest, develops its own narrative structure.
|
|
|
Post by Heron on Apr 5, 2011 20:14:33 GMT -1
If we are going to say that we are reaching consensus on this - and I'm not sure that we are - then perhaps it's worth being a bit more specific about things I have already pointed to. So, two questions: If the Pan-Psychist /Animist view that all matter is conscious holds, so that consciousness doesn't die but lives on in the world in whatever form, then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? If the Land of the Dead is a constructed meeting place does there have to be anything that actually lives there beyond those spirits or conciousnesses that have somehow chosen to live there? No, and I think 'a constructed meeting place' is a very good way of putting it. If our 'souls' reincarnate in that way, this makes sense. But I'm not sure that they do. In that sense it doesn't make a difference. But I do find speculation about potential continuation of consciousness fascinating.
|
|
|
Post by redraven on Apr 5, 2011 20:15:20 GMT -1
If we are going to say that we are reaching consensus on this - and I'm not sure that we are - then perhaps it's worth being a bit more specific about things I have already pointed to. So, two questions: If the Pan-Psychist /Animist view that all matter is conscious holds, so that consciousness doesn't die but lives on in the world in whatever form, then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? Whatever the conditions of existence dictates is appropriate. If any theory of reincarnation holds (even one that says we might be redistributed in the world as a number of different beings), then what inhabits the Land of the Dead? As above If the answer is something like "that special thing that each of us call 'me' ", is that the 'me' that existed at the point of death, and if so what of the ten year old or the thirty year old 'me' who might be different people? Where do they go? If life exists in this realm, why do you suppose that time as we experience it, i.e. the direction of time experienced by the physical, is relevent there? Is it possible that existence in this realm means that life exists "outside" of directional time? Harking back to physics, the direct of time is akin to the direction the frames of life are driven, if you are in times arrow then you experience life as growing older, but if you are outside of time, then these segments of time may be available to you for you to be able to choose certain segments when appropriate. Therefore, when trying to communicate with someone in the physical plane, the other life form may be in a position to pick a representation of themselves at a specific time to better convey their meaning to the receipient. Thus to some, it may take the form of a small child, to others, an old man. This may explain the inconsistancy of sightings and why no two people ever seem to see the same thing. RR
|
|
|
Post by Heron on Apr 5, 2011 20:24:47 GMT -1
Just to throw one more IED into the thread, when we visit the ancestors, can we be sure that we're visiting them in real time and not at a point in time when they were alive? With regards to far removed ancestors, I've always wondered whether the landscape is that of long ago, or simply of another place and I've never been able to answer that. Has anyone else experienced anything that can cast light on that aspect of our interaction with them? Read this on a blog recently, which made a lot of sense to me hengruh.livejournal.com/138224.htmlSounds good.But I wonder who the shamans and 'chaos riders' are for us today? Are there any? It has been suggested that their role is taken by the burned-out celebrities through whom we live vicariously and who 'take the rap' on our behalf for a 'chaos-riding' lifestyle. I'm not sure that that I find that prospect very appealing, which is not to say that it's untrue.
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Apr 5, 2011 20:26:28 GMT -1
If consciousness is a pre-existing potential, then it must be inherent in all matter, I regard it as a pre-existing *actual*... probably THE pre-existing actual. Matter is potential in consciousness and not the other way round. And experience is emergent as a property of consciousness through relationship. It might not sound like an important distinction but it means that those things we often regard as "abstract" have their own conscious reality independent of matter as long as they can be "in relation" Ach, I see it... I feel it, but words fail
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Apr 5, 2011 20:31:37 GMT -1
Sounds good.But I wonder who the shamans and 'chaos riders' are for us today? Are there any? It has been suggested that their role is taken by the burned-out celebrities through whom we live vicariously and who 'take the rap' on our behalf for a 'chaos-riding' lifestyle. I'm not sure that that I find that prospect very appealing, which is not to say that it's untrue. I get you... and I don't know... I was more interested in the superimposition of landscapes... personally I see it as a mythic geography but his description of a super-imposition of a shamanic and geographic landscape seemed to say pretty much the same thing. Your question begs that of "who are the myth makers and world shakers"... and to an extent I do think we can choose, at least within our smaller communities... and few here would, I suspect, choose Jordan whilst still maybe recognising the world shaping power of myth created...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2011 21:30:06 GMT -1
Is it possible that existence in this realm means that life exists "outside" of directional time? Harking back to physics, the direct of time is akin to the direction the frames of life are driven, if you are in times arrow then you experience life as growing older, but if you are outside of time, then these segments of time may be available to you for you to be able to choose certain segments when appropriate. There are a fair few mythical references to the slow passage of time in the Otherworld/Land of the Dead, so that makes sense to me. It also makes sense that those present there are able to select the time they appear in as many of the stories refer to appearances at specific points in time, to accomplish specific goals .... that would be impossible if they had no control over when they appeared.
|
|