To me, consciousness is nonlocal, just like Bohm’s interpretation of quantum particles. The term “nonlocality” refers to all points in space becoming equal to all other points in space, and it is meaningless to speak of anything as being separate from anything else. Everything, matter consists of quantum particles (which is both a wave and a particles, meaning both everywhere and somewhere), therefore, I am nonlocal and a wave, and so are you. Some particles need an observer present to not be a wave, others do not. I believe this is because some particles make up your conscious and others your subconscious.
^Article on Bohm’s theory if you are interested.
Thoughts on this topic?
@Ray Butler, Yeah same. Everything is quantum at one point because everything is matter and matter is made up out of subatomic particles and theoretically small vibrating strings. If this is so, then so is consciousness. However, we are not 100% sure what consciousness is but I think it is safe to say it is made up out of a collection of particles, as is everything.
No Ray, in the sense that stuff you look at under a microscope is not behaving quantumly. There is a difference between saying something behaves in a quantum manner and the obvious fact that all larger things are made up of smaller things, the smallest of which are of course, quantized. Quantized means discrete, only operative at certain distinct energy levels known as spin-states.
Eric, the idea that consciousness is particulate is indeed the prevailing paradigm, but is suspected by many, myself included, to be wrong.
@sumtinprophetic, Or that we are the same species going through similar experiences, which would then allow for empathy because perhaps you have had the same thing happen to you or you can imagine it happening to you. If it’s the latter, then what is imagination? We simply don’t know and that is an entirely knew topic on its own.
@blankey, The Wanting Mechanism
What is one of the most important factors in keeping us diverted from meditation in the here and now? Look inside your mind and find the wanting mechanism. The wanting mechanism continuously constructs images of new experiences the mind desires, derived from memories of the past. The mind becomes enamored with these new fantasy images and is diverted from what actually is, here and now. The eternal cosmic consciousness exists here and now, never in the future, and never in the past. Future and past are illusory and do not exist in any real physical form outside of projections of the mind. What exists now is everything, and you already have it. You only need to become conscious of your own wealth.
Wanting is part of life, creativity, family building, wealth creation, and the survival instinct. In the sense of preserving the human race on planet earth, wanting is a very good thing. In the sense of an individual becoming an awakened Buddha, wanting is a hindrance. Wanting creates duality, the wanter and that which is desired. The essay, Call For a New Buddhism, touches on this issue. Siddhartha Gautama taught that desire is a root cause of suffering. But who was he speaking to and who can actually take the last steps to enlightenment by dropping the wanting mechanism totally?
Not wanting means not wanting anything, not just dropping the desire for sex, money, and power, but also dropping the desire for truth, justice, family, and nation. It is not what you want that matters, it is the wanting mechanism itself that is the barrier. Deep meditation is a giant leap beyond logic and the norms of society. It is dissolving into infinity and oblivion and not coming back. Very few humans have been able to manage that radical transformation totally and that is why enlightenment will always be an extremely rare phenomena.
If everyone in the world suddenly became enlightened, in my opinion, the human race would come to an end. There would be a lack of sufficient desire to keep people motivated enough to have families, raise children, grow crops, and protect society from all the natural threats, from disease to ecological disaster. That said, I certainly believe that enlightenment is a desirable goal for those who really want it. But you can see the impossibility of the situation. When you “want” enlightenment your wanting mechanism is still active and enlightenment will not happen to you. So we can breathe easy that everyone in the world will not become enlightened, all at the same time, anytime soon.
The need for meditation many people feel is beyond normal logic and beyond the scope of words to fully express. I can tell you that a key to experiencing superconsciousness, from the moment you wake up in the morning until the moment you fall asleep at night, is to step back from the wanting mechanism. This stepping back is only possible for those who have reached at least the fourth stage (see The Seven Bodies). Otherwise you will not have the energy and clarity to see the wanting mechanism and realize what is involved in turning it off. You will suppress desires and live a false life because you have not yet found the inner key, which is an intense form of self-observation, not suppression. Therefore, in a way, I am stating publicly that which should remain unspoken. If you try to artificially stop wanting when you are in the first body you will never reach the second body. Even in the third body this method of not wanting will only slow down your progress, because it will be a false effort.
I do not know how long it takes for this process of stepping back from the wanting mechanism to become 100% effective. As an ordinary student, I am only now, after decades of effort, beginning to make any real progress with it. I felt obligated to mention this esoteric topic because this Web page was constructed to convey all of the best methods and the most usable of the secret teachings. Ending the wanting mechanism had to be mentioned and those who are ready for that step will find that it brings time to a halt, annihilates the future and the past, and expands consciousness to the far reaches of the universe. It is a silent, inner explosion.
Ask yourself these questions.
1) If you want something, how can you stop thinking about it?
2) If you don’t want anything, what is there to think about?
3) If you don’t want anything, is there anything to be angry about?
4) If you don’t want anything, is there anything to make you unhappy?
5) Rocks and other inanimate objects do not want and do not suffer, but they are unconscious and dead. How does a living human being enter a no-wanting state while fully conscious and filled to the brim with life energy? That is the incredible contradiction and difficulty in becoming enlightened.
At some point on your own noble path you will see very clearly that wanting is a barrier. That realization may hit you suddenly like a freight train (my blood is still on the tracks) or gradually creep into your consciousness over time. Only when you see it clearly on your own should you try to step back from the wanting mechanism. Until that right time occurs you will be needed to save this beautiful planet earth, to raise families, and to be good citizens. Take meditation one step at a time. Do not try to imitate the final steps into the abyss while you are still at the foot of the mountain.
– Christopher Calder
Just started reading Conversations With God today and this thread is so beyond relevant. Bump for its awesomeness.
We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. We are currently under mass hypnosis, creating the illusion of separation.
You are me, and I am you.
Dunno, man. I’m here, my consciousness is here, so obviously it’s got local properties.
I am conscious of being here, being now. I’m not conscious of being anywhere else or at any point in time. Sounds local to me.
I can observe my thoughts, feelings, sensory input, here and now, but nobody else’s. I can theorize/imagine about others’ thoughts and feelings and whatnot, but that’s using the creative mind, not observation. Consciousness appears to be within me, aka local.
I know that I am, I know that I see and think. I can see that I am a separate being, I can distance myself from other lifeforms or shut myself down, but I am still conscious and I still AM. This implies, to me, that my consciousness is mine.
I’m in my mind, not in anyone else’s. Nobody else is in my mind. I am conscious of me being an individual. Sounds very much local to me.
I see no evidence of a nonlocal consciousness. Only theories, but theories are imagination, not observation. They tend to bring more illusions than clarity.
Nonlocal consciousness, local (focal!) awareness.
People say “how do you explain nonlocality?”
A better question in a universe that created spacetime is, “how do you explain emergence of locality?
Locality would be a cosmic illusion, or as Einstein put it, “an optical delusion of consciousness.”
Nonlocality would be a fundamental pre-space universal quality. Just so happens consciousness is a fundamental pre-space universal quality…
It makes it very difficult to discuss this when people are confused as to use of the terms involved. The first bit of this video clarifies… and the rest of the video settles the thread’s question.
@Blankey, when you’re done with that book, come see me. I’ll have some recommendations you’ll dig even more.
@manimal, What about the Global Consciousness Project? The idea that you can “feel” someone staring at you? The fact that we are empathetic. The fact that certain inventions pop up everywhere around the globe (before we had telephones and shit) at the same time, almost as if we are tuning into this informational packet that anyone can apparently access.
@nightowl, I’m currently reading like 5 books including Conversations With God which seems to touch on what your book does. Once I’m done with it I am going to check your recommendation out of the library if they have it. If not, I suppose I’ll buy it on amazon.
But yes, I agree. Consciousness=nonlocal, Awareness/Perception=separation and local.
@blankey, I don’t see how any of those things would require the existence of some sort of global consciousness.
You can feel someone staring at you, yes. Is that so weird? The human senses are much more powerful than they’re credited for. One thing to note here is that everything has an electromagnetic charge and structure, and we should be able to feel things subtly changing, even if we don’t consciously notice it. Another thing to note is that the optic thalamus is structured in the same way as the receivers used for many wireless/RC devices.
Empathy, well that’s mind-stuff. Thoughts and feelings. I think X about person A, I feel Y for person A. It’s in one’s head, it’s an internal reaction just like any other reaction/reflex. Does catching your balance, sighing, or fleeing imply that there’s a global consciousness? Then how does empathy? They’re just reactions.
Not everybody feels empathy, and for those who do it’s very situational. Just because I feel empathy for someone doesn’t mean you do, and vice versa, it’s highly opinionated and that can only mean one thing; that it’s based on thoughts.
Inventions popping up in different places without interconnection… there could be many explanations for that. You know, it could just be the next logical step to invent said thing, the unfolding of events tend to follow patterns which are the same everywhere. Seems like a built-in law of reality to me, and not like a conscious being pulling the strings.
I’m not claiming that there is no global consciousness, just that I have yet to see any evidence or hint for it, and that I do not believe in its existence. Claiming knowledge of it would be very foolish. And logically there could very likely be a global consciousness.
However, the arguments/evidence you proposed for its existence aren’t really waterproof, the connection between the existence of those things and the existence of a global consciousness are just assumptions. Leaps in conclusion.
@crossingtheeventhorizon, Everything, quantum or not, behaves in one of two ways 1) It forges constructive relationships 2) It behaves as a destructive force. Nothingness is the only truly neutral phenomena, but that does not exist in this universe as far as we know because as far as we know.
So I don’t know what you mean by things behaving quantumly, but if that is what quantum means, operating at distinct energy level spin states, then I’ll take your word on it.
@trek79, Yeah that’s what quantum means, that it involves discrete levels rather than a continuous unbroken movement. But yeah what you’re getting at is a good point about construction and destruction; I think of this as extropic or entropic, moving toward a higher state of order or lower state of thermodynamic randomness. Life/mind is in direct opposition to the tendency for entropy to increase.
@trek79, @crossingtheeventhorizon, “Quantum mechanics (QM – also known as quantum physics, or quantum theory) is a branch of physics dealing with physical phenomena at microscopic scales, where the action is on the order of the Planck constant. Quantum mechanics departs from classical mechanics primarily at the quantum realm of atomic and subatomic length scales. Quantum mechanics provides a mathematical description of much of the dual particle-like and wave-like behavior and interactions of energy and matter.” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics
Looks like it is dealing with “physical phenomena at microscopic scales”. So how are Ray and I wrong when thinking quantum deals with matter at the microscopic level? I seriously have no idea why you think we are wrong.
This provides quite a bit of insight on the topic and consciousness in general. In many ways it is essentially a college course on the physics and metaphysics of consciousness. I learned an incredible amount and I would highly recommend it to anyone who wants to explore the phenomenon of mind (that should be all of you).
Nonlocal; considering from personal experience that my mindset, will, and even sometimes meaningless actions evoke responses in supposedly unrelated environments, I find it hard to believe there isn’t a true collective consciousness. I also believe everyone has at multiple points in time tapped into some portion of this source of infinite knowledge. How else would you explain epiphanies; especially the ones that are incredibly insightful and have absolutely no instigation from your part whatsoever?
“Nothing that coincides is ever coincidental” -Sabby
@crossingtheeventhorizon, sufficiently is a slightly ambiguous term. If you look at it from a psychological/physiological perspective, consciousness can be pretty clearly described as the interaction of memories and all current stimuli, all of these neurotransmitters sending signals between neurons in fractions of a second, coalescing in your central nervous system. Take the next few steps from this perspective into the atomic – then subatomic – then quantum perspectives, knowing that all subatomic particles can be/will be/are also waves (and vice versa) it stands to reason that instant “communication” (or an almost instantaneous exchange of electrons) between a multitude of memories is possible and in fact happening at any given time.