Can one person make a difference?

[Sheikah]

Actually, not true...studies conducted by hospitals indicate that even clinically dead people can have lucid near-death or out-of-body experiences. This reinforces the notion that consciousness might not be limited to a functioning brain, but might also exist independently...Similar to the experiences of seasoned meditators, who report being able to remain totally conscious even after their senses have shut down in deep meditation...

 

Clinically dead people aren't really dead if they are conscious...clearly. If by clinically dead you mean no pulse/heartbeat, they're clearly on their last seconds of life. Not sure where you're getting that from though. I think you've picked up some really strange ideas about consciousness, when clearly it's the result of having a complete body (you can't be conscious without a brain, try removing someone's brain and see what happens). Also, for your evidence, please source to an accredited journal paper.

 

Think of it like this. You agree that a newborn baby can see, feel and touch, right? Well that baby was made completely in the mother's womb, from the mother's own 'building blocks', if you will (plus DNA from the father). Thus, it's obvious that however consciousness is formed, it is formed as part of the human body and definitely part of the brain. A baby born without a brain would not only be unconscious, it'd be dead (obviously).

 

So consider what the mother has eaten, to provide protein among other 'building blocks' to form a baby. These are things that were in the vicinity of the mother; in order for them to construct part of a living being they would have to be directly accessible to the mother. As in, definitely within the solar system at least. There's really no two ways about this, because we've followed the development of animals in vivo; you can see an animal grow, with nutrients typically derived from the placenta (at least in mammals); these are clearly used for growth, etc.

[Aimless]

Why's everyone talking about consciousness? Is it to obfuscate how clearly flawed Sheikah's stance is, what with the very notion of "we're destroying the planet, but we can't make a difference" being patently contradictory and defeatist?

 

If you want to talk about things that are pointless, approaching life from the perspective of the universe's duration is entirely so. Our lifespans, likely our entire race's longevity, is nothing when looked at within such a scale. The universe is so vast as to be meaningless to the human brain.

 

Something we can appreciate, something that exists on a scale we're intimately familiar with, is each other. When people talk about "saving the planet" they don't literally mean stopping the destruction of the Earth — it's already survived several apocalyptic events, it'll survive whatever we throw at it — what they really mean is maintaining the habitat that birthed us. "Saving the planet" is saving ourselves, generations present and future.

 

Pollution and contemporary farming certainly aren't doing our environment any good, but in the short term it's also ruining other people's lives right now. Whether it's deforestation threatening the places they live, rubbish clogging up streets and fishing grounds, or industrial pollution causing sickness and death in the less fortunate.

 

I'm not a vegetarian and I don't see much merit in veganism. However, if someone else does I'm not going to deride them for it. I can respect anyone who is trying to improve themselves, someone that sees something they don't like and attempts to do something about it. Do I agree with them? Probably not, but that doesn't give me the right to look down on them from my throne of inaction.

[Diageo]

Lucid near death or out of body experiences are just the brain hallucinating as it struggles for oxygen.

[Sheikah]

Why's everyone talking about consciousness? Is it to obfuscate how clearly flawed Sheikah's stance is, what with the very notion of "we're destroying the planet, but we can't make a difference" being patently contradictory and defeatist?

The attitude may not please you, and I can understand why. But at the end of the day, it boils down to this - the positive aspect of an individual choosing not to eat meat will be monumentally dwarved by pollution elsewhere in the world. You may well argue it's worth trying anyway, but I don't believe so. Not because I'm negative, it's simply because I don't believe in putting effort into something that will make absolutely no difference in the grand scheme of things. And it's annoying, because I'd like to make a difference, but with countries spilling fumes into the atmosphere there is nothing that any of us can really do to stop the atmosphere getting worse year on year. Our individual outputs compared to that of factories are horrendously miniscule.

 

Contrast this to going to Africa and working as an aid worker, where you do make a very big difference to people's lives. That's all I was getting at - a lot of effort for something that won't actually save the planet (proven in part, by the fact he said he was buying a car - although we can individually reduce the carbon footprint, the only way any real impact could be brought about is through legislation).

 

I guess the annoying thing is that if you cut out meat and therefore contribute less to CO2 from animal rearing/transport, but then use your car every day you're doing far more bad than good.

Edited August 29, 2010 by Sheikah

[Ville]

Clinically dead people aren't really dead if they are conscious...clearly. If by clinically dead you mean no pulse/heartbeat, they're clearly on their last seconds of life.

 

Clinical death: is the medical term for cessation of blood circulation and breathing, the two necessary criteria to sustain life. It occurs when the heart stops beating in a regular rhythm, a condition called cardiac arrest.

 

After your heart stops, your respiration, organs and brain stop functioning within seconds...However, you still have about an hour's time to reverse the process...

 

when clearly it's the result of having a complete body (you can't be conscious without a brain, try removing someone's brain and see what happens).

 

Heh, sure the body becomes inanimate, but how can you know what happens to the consciousness itself? The fact that you cannot sense it anymore does not mean it could not exist in some form...

 

Also, for your evidence, please source to an accredited journal paper.

 

One of the studies referred to was from The Lancet, though I think you'll find Dr Sam Parnia's video much more interesting...It's a rather extensive lecture on near-death experiences during cardiac arrest, but also explains the AWARE study, which aims to find out more about the validity of NDE's. If you do not have the patience or interest, start at about 35 mins or so...

 

Lucid near death or out of body experiences are just the brain hallucinating as it struggles for oxygen.

 

According to Dr. Parnia, this is only one possibility...hence the research.

 

Why's everyone talking about consciousness? Is it to obfuscate how clearly flawed Sheikah's stance is, what with the very notion of "we're destroying the planet, but we can't make a difference" being patently contradictory and defeatist?

 

Heh, it's just debate...point and counter-point. Just shows you how deep these issues go...all the way to beliefs about life, death and the nature of existence...

 

Still, you do have a point...not sure if there's any sense in continuing this much longer...after all, it's just about differing attitudes, that's all...

Edited August 29, 2010 by Ville

[Sheikah]

I like this debate about consciousness, it's interesting.

 

After your heart stops, your respiration, organs and brain stop functioning within seconds...However, you still have about an hour's time to reverse the process...

 

What about a person who is truly dead (e.g. for over a day)? They don't have any brain activity. And they definitely aren't conscious.

 

 

Heh, sure the body becomes inanimate, but how can you know what happens to the consciousness itself? The fact that you cannot sense it anymore does not mean it could not exist in some form...

 

But consciousness is just a mix of several brain regions activated at once. e.g. sound, sight, language, etc. This can be proven be damaging particular regions of the brain. A stroke commonly does this - it affects one side of the brain, and takes sensory regions associated with that part with it (or makes them less effective). So really, consciousness; being alive and alert with your senses is the function of an active brain. And when you're dead, it's gone.

 

 

One of the studies referred to was from The Lancet, though I think you'll find Dr Sam Parnia's video much more interesting...It's a rather extensive lecture on near-death experiences during cardiac arrest, but also explains the AWARE study, which aims to find out more about the validity of NDE's. If you do not have the patience or interest, start at about 35 mins or so...

 

 

 

According to Dr. Parnia, this is only one possibility...hence the research.

 

The clear factor here though is 'near death'. Having been alive so close to these events must be a factor for why the brain is stil partially active. You wouldn't find an active brain in a person long dead, that's for sure. And if a dead person can't see, feel, touch, speak or sense anything at all, how is that conscious?

[Aimless]

The attitude may not please you, and I can understand why. But at the end of the day, it boils down to this - the positive aspect of an individual choosing not to eat meat will be monumentally dwarved by pollution elsewhere in the world. You may well argue it's worth trying anyway, but I don't believe so. Not because I'm negative, it's simply because I don't believe in putting effort into something that will make absolutely no difference in the grand scheme of things. And it's annoying, because I'd like to make a difference, but with countries spilling fumes into the atmosphere there is nothing that any of us can really do to stop the atmosphere getting worse year on year. Our individual outputs compared to that of factories are horrendously miniscule.

Where would we be if the Suffragettes or instigators of the underground railroad had taken this point of view? What if every soldier in every war had told themselves, "I'm only one man, I can't make a difference"?

 

Everyone is an individual. If we were all powerless we would have no science, no mathematics, no philosophy. One way or another an individual has helped birth every single advancement in humanity's history.

 

Nicktendo's actions won't save the world single-handedly, but he can be part of a seachange. And even if that doesn't happen, at least he stood for something other than apathy; maybe his actions won't count for anything in the end, but he stands a better chance than those that do nothing.

[Sheikah]

Well I guess it's a case of selectively caring for me. I tend to care about things that I genuinely believe I can make a difference in (as I'm sure people fighting for the environment do). But I'm not convinced. I don't think I could rally enough people to my cause to impact change, whereas giving blood actually saves lives for definite. That's just me.

[Aimless]

For the record I have no real animosity towards you. Nor do I find anything particularly wrong with the way you live your life, as even if you aren't some sort of of eco-warrior you still appear to 'go with the flow', as it were; I'm hardly a model citizen either and I try to avoid hypocrisy.

 

The simple fact is we can't care about everything, it would be impossible to get through the day if we did. We're all guilty of indifference, that's just life. All I ask is that you don't advocate apathy; it's something best kept to oneself.

[Diageo]

Maybe a new thread about consciousness?

[Ville]

But consciousness is just a mix of several brain regions activated at once. e.g. sound, sight, language, etc. This can be proven be damaging particular regions of the brain. A stroke commonly does this - it affects one side of the brain, and takes sensory regions associated with that part with it (or makes them less effective). So really, consciousness; being alive and alert with your senses is the function of an active brain.

 

True, the brain with its different parts seems to be linked with certain areas of consciousness, like sensory perception...

 

And when you're dead, it's gone.

 

Well that would be the first conclusion, yes. However, in the light of NDE's and deep meditation experiences (jhana), this is not so certain anymore...Why can people still be conscious despite their brain being dead or their senses having completely shut down?

 

The clear factor here though is 'near death'. Having been alive so close to these events must be a factor for why the brain is stil partially active.

 

This is a possibility as well...

 

You wouldn't find an active brain in a person long dead, that's for sure. And if a dead person can't see, feel, touch, speak or sense anything at all, how is that conscious?

 

Now the problem with permanently dead people is...that we simply do not know what happens with their consciousness. The closest we can get is by examining those who went into the clinically dead state, but still came back. In death, the body has shut down, but does this mean that there is no consciousness at all? True, there's no power to animate the body anymore, which could mean the total dissipation of consciousness, but there's also the possibility of survival and separation...

 

When describing NDE's or out-of-body experiences (OBE), people report being able to perceive their environments like normal, or even in a heightened manner. The typical example would be witnessing your own (dead) body lying in a hospital bed...while you were outside it. Thus, it's a possibility that after death, you could end up just like this...fully conscious, but just separated from your body...

 

Which brings us to the next question: what is a consciousness / mind anyway, especially if it's something more than just a product of a working brain? Dr. Parnia listed some theories in his video (45 mins):

 

- somehow generated on a subatomic level

- a separate, yet undiscovered scientific entity which cannot be reduced down, like gravity or electromagnetism

- mind being separate from brain

 

I find the second thought quite fascinating...

[Tissue Town]

If we've learnt anything from this thread it's that you don't want to be stuck with Sheikah or Tissue Town should you happen to get caught up in a disaster situation. They'll probably just keel over on the spot and waste away.

 

I think you'll find that when there is a disaster situation I will most likely do what I can to save myself and point at whoever is left behind and simply proclaim, "Natural selection, yo".

[Sheikah]

True, the brain with its different parts seems to be linked with certain areas of consciousness, like sensory perception...

 

 

 

Well that would be the first conclusion, yes. However, in the light of NDE's and deep meditation experiences (jhana), this is not so certain anymore...Why can people still be conscious despite their brain being dead or their senses having completely shut down?

 

Yes but it's clear that this is only the case in people where their organs or whatever were functioning a very short time ago, not people who have been dead in the ground for a year. Still a bit iffy about that research, but either way; if consciousness was independent of body state then there would be people who died years ago still conscious.

 

 

When describing NDE's or out-of-body experiences (OBE), people report being able to perceive their environments like normal, or even in a heightened manner. The typical example would be witnessing your own (dead) body lying in a hospital bed...while you were outside it. Thus, it's a possibility that after death, you could end up just like this...fully conscious, but just separated from your body...

 

But surely you must know that's impossible. Without eyes, you can't see- if you rip out your eyes, you won't be able to see. Therefore people seeing their body from the outside are clearly hallucinating.

 

All in all, if you can't feel, hear, see, think, taste; all senses assigned to regions of the brain, there is nothing left. That is what consciousness is; all those functions active at once. Without a brain, you don't have those functions. Thus there is no such thing as a consciousness without a brain.

[Frank]

With all this debate and conversation about consciousness I can't help but remember this pretty inspiring video by a scientist. Basically, she talks about what it felt like to have a stroke and explains it in such a strange and unique way. If you've got 20 minutes to spare or just interested then this is sure to interest you a little

 

 

Love this video.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Truly interesting video! I couldn't tell if she was a spiritual individual or if she simply had a peculiar way of describing her experiences.

[Frank]

She is quite amazing, isn't she! :p

It's rare you come across a hippie/scientist type, haha.

 

She would also definitely be someone who I'd love to just chat about anything for hours. Interesting lady.

[Ville]

Yes but it's clear that this is only the case in people where their organs or whatever were functioning a very short time ago, not people who have been dead in the ground for a year.

 

Again, the problem is that we cannot communicate with those people...since they died and did not come back. Thus we don't know for sure what really happens...

 

Still a bit iffy about that research, but either way; if consciousness was independent of body state then there would be people who died years ago still conscious.

 

Like you said earlier, the brain does seem to affect the consciousness in some form...Thus it could be that the consciousness, despite being able to exist independently, gets somehow lodged in the body, and thus becomes partly(?) governed by this physical manifestation. Should the link station, i.e. brain, lose its power to harness the consciousness, the latter would then be restored to its "free" state...

 

But surely you must know that's impossible. Without eyes, you can't see- if you rip out your eyes, you won't be able to see. Therefore people seeing their body from the outside are clearly hallucinating.

 

Impossible is a very strong word...Could be hallucination, true, but could be something else...

 

All in all, if you can't feel, hear, see, think, taste; all senses assigned to regions of the brain, there is nothing left.

 

Actually...seems that in the jhana states of meditation, you cannot think and your senses shut down. And yet, you're still fully conscious...

 

Love this video.

 

Thanks for sharing, great video...Makes perfect sense, too. Seems like my thinking neurosis came from a governing left hemisphere, whereas now I've shifted into the acceptance and just being of the right one...

[Sheikah]

Actually...seems that in the jhana states of meditation, you cannot think and your senses shut down. And yet, you're still fully conscious...

I just need to clarify this because this seems to be the very cornerstone of what I'm getting at...

 

If you shut down everything that defines consciousness (seeing, hearing, thinking, taste, etc) then what exactly are you saying is left when you say people are 'still conscious'? Being conscious is the combination of all the senses that you said were just shut down.

[Diageo]

You can't see without eyes, so yes it is impossible. Anything else is not seeing. Technically it could[/] be anything. But if we thought like that about everything instead of going for the most obvious we'd never get anywhere.

[Ville]

If you shut down everything that defines consciousness (seeing, hearing, thinking, taste, etc) then what exactly are you saying is left when you say people are 'still conscious'? Being conscious is the combination of all the senses that you said were just shut down.

 

Well, if such meditation states do exist, it would mean that a consciousness is not limited to just sensory perception and the thinking mind...but is something more than that. Whether you think this could be possible or impossible is up to you...However, these kinds of experiences are widely mentioned in different spiritual practices around the world, so it's not just something one person / group has conjured up...

 

Personally, I cannot yet say whether these kinds of states exist or not, since I have no personal experience in them...And even if I could, you'd still have to be open to the possibility of them existing, since these kinds of inner phenomena cannot just be videoed or recorded...