dimreepr

6 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

While it’s challenging to test scientifically, experiencing it becomes more accessible when one is open and willing to eliminate mental distractions, allowing for a deeper connection to the present moment.

Many surveys of meditators reveal that, upon quieting the mind and entering deep states of stillness, they report experiencing a sense of omnipresence, unity, disolving of ego and a higher order. When the mind is stilled, one might expect emptiness or nothingness, but instead, a whole new awareness seems to emerge, offering profound and unexpected insights.

I could provide survey results if that would be helpful.

What are these profound and unexpected insights?

This sounds to me like a Buddha wannabee that doesn't understand the teaching and so present's a word salad, in the hope that it contains some sort of nutrition for the soul; and enough of them buy a ticket.

I can provide a lot of link's from the likes of Derren Brown if that would help you...

Just now, m_m said:

flood

Are you stoned??? (lucky bugger)...

Not generally... 😉

15 hours ago, m_m said:

And when I am under anesthesia, I don't remember myself, but a doctor DOES. So, I am his(her) memory.  When I am awake, I'm still in a doctor's memory. That's why I think that we are memories for each other. And it's up to us what memories we leave to our neighbors.

Time, and space, is the enemy of this conjecture. 🙄

Besides, I get the feeling someone is talking to themselves... 🤓

15 hours ago, iNow said:

He is not a practicing scientist 

Indeed, that thought struck me too...

21 hours ago, Migveg19 said:

Please talk with me I promise you still don’t understand what it is I’m saying to even say I’m wrong. Please literally on anything phone call, zoom, messenger call anything your willing to talk on. I can explain it completely better than I can on text i promise you will understand. All I ask is you help me help others understand after I get you to. Literally not one person has fully understood or even come close to proving me wrong do to not being able to actually understand so if you will please it will open your mind. Thanks

Believe me, I understand your frustration. You have a profound thought that you're unable to transfer into an understandable language but you know it's important, like waking up from a vivid dream; how am I, or a practicing scientist, supposed to prove your imagination is wrong?

One day, evolution will solve it for us... 😣

Some sort of memory, with some sort of vessel. 

13 hours ago, Migveg19 said:

You may have read them all, but I would go read them again. Most of them say time and time again, that I’m not saying that you will have never lived your experiences.  just that you would not remember that you ever knew them key words “knew them”! So pretty much, if you’re dead and no longer have that thing in your head called a brain, to use the memories you have, or even remember anything, then how do you remember, let alone remember you existed. For a memory to work as a memory you must actually be able to access these memories, so with out a vessel to hold them or allow to access them then you can’t use them and if you can’t remember living then how would you know you lived at all even though you did! And for everything you said I believe it to be nonsense, because if you forget something like being a gymnast, then you can’t just do gymnastics, although yes your muscles would be worked to do so (your legs stronger and all that) and your muscles follow a path that they are used to, more than mine do. You would still know nothing of being a gymnast and prolly be trash at it because of the lack of actual skill and knowledge. But anyway please keep asking questions I will not give up on you 

No I’m in Texas sorry but I really would love to start a zoom meeting with everyone here to explain completely what im talking about 

As @Phi for All and I have been trying to explain, Phi rather more patiently than me, your premise is false and therefore any conclusions you make, based on that assumption, can only be true by accident... 😉

For instance, "power corrupts, therefore absolute power corrupts absolutely"; we don't really know, not enough candidates for a significant statistical study.

But I did forget yesterday and I can still dress myself, hint, the odds aren't getting bigger. 

I'd like to indulge your fantasy, but it might have been a dream and that would be confusing...😉

13 hours ago, Migveg19 said:

I have rewritten my thesis hopefully you read it and it gives you a better understanding of what I’ve been talking about which again you are utterly confused about. I have said nothing of changing what happens tomorrow only your awareness of it all, maybe I can talk over phone with you and explain it better one on one or over a zoom meeting. but for now I will say thank you for engaging in this conversation appreciate you

If you're anywhere near Stonehouse (Gloucestershire), pop round and we can share a beer, and I can explain why your thesis lacks the clarity needed to explain anything worthwhile; just saying that I'm confused isn't a supportive argument... 😣

14 hours ago, Migveg19 said:

Hello my name is Miguel Vega I want to start this by saying if anyone knows of any literature or further evidence of this theory being asked before please let me know.

Epiphenomenalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

2 minutes ago, Migveg19 said:

I’m not saying nor have ever said that life had no meaning y’all just refuse to understand me due to ignorance. I’m basically giving a reason why there must me an experience after the one of this life. Otherwise the existence of the experience to yourself would feel like it never happend. do to not having a vessel like your brain to remember them with, ergo no memory no idea you even had the experience, no idea you even existed in the first place.

Yesterday will always affect tomorrow, it both needs you and doesn't give a shit.

I understand you, you think heaven is to come, and so you ignore the heaven you're experiencing now; I'm content with now and I don't really care what you think, unless you can make a lot more sense, and actually support your argument... 🙄 

16 hours ago, Migveg19 said:

Yes you are correct. and for yet another time, I will say I never said you didn’t live these experiences you definitely did. let’s, say an entire life of them but what I’m saying is that if you come to forget them wether it be due to the deterioration of your brain in death or otherwise, just loss off that experience in one’s mind (vessel) then to that person as far as they know they never lived that experience even tho yes yes yes they did indeed live it sir. Let give one more example, think back to being a baby you can’t remember being a newborn neither can I, to us it feels like it never even happened although it did ofcourse. so the same way it felt like you were never a baby because you have no memory of it. if your neural pathways, the reason you have memory in the first place and the place memories are stored deteriorate then you can’t remember the experiences therefore no memory, no idea you even had them in the first place. And tbh you don’t understand answers that are given to you not the other way around, your just asking questions that don’t help you understand the entire premise itself. but nevertheless again I hope you understand and if not lmk I will explain it again lol

When you die, does your life mean nothing?

When you forget, does that experience mean nothing?

If so, how?

Listen to George... 😉 @TheVat +1

4 minutes ago, Migveg19 said:

 

Hello thanks for your feedback, I am starting to realize that my writing is hard to follow. but let me explain what I was saying, I know that you existed even if you come to forget your memories. but what I’m saying is that if you will one day forget your experiences, it will feel to you, as though you never lived them at alll. If all the experiences and memories you ever had are to leave you at onc, it would almost be like to you as a the being who’s experiences and memories are gone, that you never even existed having no memory of ever existing. So in conclusion you are the only one making assumptions and now that I explained it I hope it seems more plausible now. Also there are a lot of things I mention to support this but if you have more doubts feel free to ask thanks

You haven't really explained anything, in either of your post's.

But in answer to the topic title, how long of a memory are you talking about? And how does it relate to epistemology? 

For instance, I can't remember what I had for tea yesterday, bc I drank too much; but I do know how to dress myself, despite that... 😉

Here we go again, watch 'the life of brian' and think... 

8 hours ago, KJW said:

That's "un-American"! And I say "un-American" because I can't think of any other country that thinks like that. Yes, capitalism exists throughout the West, and conservative governments do push for privatisation, but this idea that any hint of socialism is thoroughly evil seems to me to be a uniquely American phenomenon.

Nope, they're just patient zero, I know the UK has been infected and I've heard a few sniffles next door in Europe...🤢

47 minutes ago, swansont said:

In theory, yes. ERs in the US are obligated to treat all emergencies owing to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA)

In practice, they would likely be very stingy regarding what is an emergency condition, and do the minimum required.

25 minutes ago, Genady said:

May I offer anecdotal evidence? My wife used to be a psychiatric nurse in NY hospital in Greenwich Village, Manhattan, 30 years ago. You can imagine that they had a lot of emergency homeless patients there. They treated all of them well, in practice.

Thanks guy's for removing another of my assumptions...

@Genady do you, or your wife, think the situation has improved over the last 30 year's?

17 hours ago, LuckyR said:

Not my point (that the homeless are, in fact wealthy), rather that Homeless guy in 2025 who gets appendicitis can go an ER and receive an appendectomy. Alexander, alas has a majority chance of dying. 

Can a homeless guy just rock up to ER and get treated, in America?

Besides you're straying off the point, the difference in tech is irrelevant...

17 hours ago, LuckyR said:

As to Joe Schmo, he uses the vast majority of his wealth. Bezos, OTOH will use a small fraction of his wealth. Of course Bezos is definitely rich, only a simpleton would attempt to say differently, but >90% of his wealth is essentially superfluous and in my opinion that portion, when used to compare eras, is more misleading than informative. 

The economy can't distinguish between dollars and its owners, it's more complicated, the economy needs Joe to spend everything he's got and it needs Jeff to invest, but in the case of Jeff, it needs to believe he's good for it and not just cooking the book's, like Don.  

But when the balance is off, there will be a reckoning...

23 hours ago, Gees said:

The members of this forum are seriously biased against religion and even philosophy, so I don't know why you posted in this forum. I suppose you read that this was the philosophy forum so you thought it would be OK. No. The members of this forum believe that science is the beginning and end of knowledge. This means that if the information did not come from science, then it can not possibly be knowledge. It could be imagination, speculation, or maybe garbage, but it is not knowledge.

But  I found your thoughts interesting. You still need to do some work on your ideas,  but I doubt that you will get any help here.

 

Gee

I find this offensive, you clearly didn't research my credentials, or put any thoght into your post...

Knowledge is a form of information that some call data, any philosophy that doesn't include it, is a joke...

So I laugh at you... 

3 hours ago, Linkey said:

Currently it is possible to perform referendums via the internet. so a referendum each week is indeed possible. But the ruling politicians are not motivated to implement this...

How do you you differentiate between referendum and democracy, in your fantasy political league???

4 hours ago, LuckyR said:

As to your comparo between eras, homeless people in the US have access to goods and services that Alexander the Great couldn't acquire with all of his accumulated wealth.

This is Daily Mail territory, 'homeless people earn more than us, by begging'...

Homeless people across the age's rely on the charity of people who have more than they need, but are close enough to poverty, to understand 'there but for the grace of <insert lucky token> go I'...

Alexander the great didn't need a smartphone... 😉

4 hours ago, LuckyR said:

Musk vs Bezos illustrates the point, it isn't itself the point.

Musk, Bezos and their ilk are invoked when statistics such as: "the top 0.001% owns more wealth than the bottom blah, blah percent ". It's a great headline but when talking about those few individuals, most of their wealth includes huge numbers of dollars that I referred to (and that you apparently agreed with) that aren't as valuable as the dollars Joe Schmo uses to fill his car with gas (since those dollars will never be spent by their owners in their lifetime).

This is completely opposite to reality, Joe Schmo's dallar can only fill his gas tank or belly then it's gone and everyone (including himself) believes that he's one step away from the gutter; if either of these guy's spend their last dollar, no-one wants to believe it, and everyone will make sure they don't see the gutter, lest they follow...

22 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Nothing can help the uninformed except luck or information. Best of luck!

In this context, how does it help you?

21 hours ago, Phi for All said:

If you can't figure that out, just be lunch.

One day, one of us will be wrong...

20 hours ago, Phi for All said:

If you can't figure that out, just be lunch.

Everything is lunch for something, how does it help to know something one can't change?

5 hours ago, LuckyR said:

Sure, it's obvious if you're working on their home, but who gets to see the inside of someone's home (who isn't in the building profession)? No, I meant when you meet folks in real life, out and about.

The only difference is, context...

5 hours ago, LuckyR said:

Well wealth inequity definitely huge in the US today BUT in my opinion, it is an error to treat every dollar of "wealth" equally. For example, if Musk has $429 billion and Bezos only has $241 billion, is Musk twice as wealthy? A statistician would say yes. To me they're equally wealthy because the amount of money they can spend in their lifetimes is essentially equal.

In prior eras, with huge peasant classes and small merchant classes, wealth inequity was much greater, even if a statistician tells you that the sums involved were smaller, thus the difference between "rich" and "poor" weren't in the same realm as a Musk situation.

Define wealth...

21 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

The Parasitic Class has a different definition of symbiosis. Why aren't you happy to be sucked dry? The benefits are obvious to them. You're the one who doesn't understand.

If I'm harboring a parasite, how does it help me to know that?

21 hours ago, Phi for All said:

And you don't feel it might be a mistake to assume the wealthy don't like your looks as opposed to anything else? Why are you part of the problem if you're nice to everyone? We're not talking about the wealthy, the elite, the upper tier.

8 hours ago, iNow said:

What about the second half of your sentence, the part where you dismiss all rich people equally as not gaining peace through their actions? How do you know anything whatsoever about their actions or sense of peace?

Poetic licence, the assumption I'm making is, people that chase money as their meaning of self worth, which is like trying to punch smoke as a means of keeping score, it's always tomorrow that I'll score the point that means I win; I can't think of a more disappointing thing to realise on one's death bed, surrounded by all one's scrabbling offspring, who are all to eager to repeat one's missed opportunities; a christmass carol, that I tried to condense into a sentence.

21 hours ago, Phi for All said:

We're talking about the Parasitic Class, who are sucking the life out of the rest of us. Their type of wealth IS evil, and they want you to believe you don't look good enough to be around them.

Parasite's aren't evil, they just don't understand the benefits of symbiosis...

36 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

If intelligence exists in all living things,

Then we're no better than a worm...

20 hours ago, iNow said:

So now you’re saying it IS ubiquitous?

I don't think recognising who has more money than me, needs a time stamp or much intelligence, but I suppose it depends on one's definition of ubiquitous in this context. 

15 hours ago, swansont said:

This does not rule out that the problem is you

LOL, indeed...

14 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I'm not sure it matters how you look, or even that there's a "class" difference. If you're paying for labor in modern times, you're trying to pay the least amount you can to get the job done right. If you're wealthy, you know exactly how much that labor is worth to you, how much you'd like to pay, and how much more you would have paid if the laborer had insisted. 

The Lords and Ladies may simply be embarrassed to eat with someone they've royally screwed over. Deep down they know how much more your labor is worth, perhaps? If I had shortchanged a laborer, the last think I'd want is to eat food off their table in front of their spouse and kids.

I'm judging everyone on how they look and how they behave, but I smile at everyone and say hello; if they don't respond to my liking, I just shrug and think karma will take care of that prick and, "as if by magic", they vanish from my mind and I feel wealthier for it...

18 hours ago, iNow said:

Winning the lottery paradoxically also brings lots of negatives like people trying to take advantage of you, scam you, pretending to be family, never knowing whether the people in your life are there bc of who you are and not just seeking a quick payout, etc. 

Either way, painting all people with the same brush based on single traits like this is a false generalization and logical fallacy. 

My argument is, all people can be wealthy, not, all rich people can't...