The gatekeeper thing did it for me. That's the image I'll keep from this.
Traditional name self realisation... scientific name consciousness
Thought
Thought
The gatekeeper thing did it for me. That's the image I'll keep from this.
Post content
Traditional name self realisation
Scientific name consciousness
You are probably thinking, "Right, well, I know myself." But the truth is that you don't. Just forget about these things; we will jump right to the experiment. Ask yourself this question each time: "Who am I?" every time we dive deeper and deeper into this experiment.
First question: Are you your environment? Like trees, cars, buildings, stones, etc. No, you are not. Are you your hand? This is your hand, but you are not that hand, right? So you cannot possibly be any part of your body, right? They are yours, but not you, right?
Before we jump to the next question, you must first have a clear definition of the mind. But to make it simpler, let's just say the mind is nothing but a collection of thoughts, or thoughts which you feel toward your head. Now, are you the mind? You can experience these thoughts, and you can probably manipulate these thoughts too, but are you actually these thoughts, or are these thoughts yours? So you cannot possibly be the mind, too.
Are you a personality which you think you are, or is that personality just yours? Like a person who has a personality of anger—is that angry personality you, or is that feeling just an experience? We humans generally experience our whole life within the mind, body, or personality, labeling it as "us," but are these things actually us, or are we just experiencing these things just like how a gatekeeper watches a gate?
So, who am I then? It is a bit tricky, but from this experiment, you can clearly conclude one thing: that is, you are just a watcher, and you cannot become the things which you are watching. Simply put, from this you can clearly see that in everything—from body to mind to environment—your nature of seeing never changes, and you will always feel your presence as a watcher. So you are an experiencer, and the rest of the things are experiences. The definition of self is something which is experiencing experiences.
Now, go back again with this experiment and try to see whether it is wrong or right?
So what is consciousness? Knowing its nature is easy, but claiming to see it is not possible because if you saw consciousness, then who would be seeing that consciousness?
Thoughts
-
I'm not sure the watcher thing totally holds though. Like if everything is just experiences, then isn't the watcher also an experience? Idk, maybe I'm thinking about this wrong.
-
The gatekeeper thing did it for me. That's the image I'll keep from this.
-
Does calling yourself the watcher actually answer the 'who am I' question, or just move it back one step? Like, who is the watcher observing itself?
Related posts
-
Oneness the end of spirituality and become one with exsistence......
The final realization is that everything is one. I will try to give a simpler, easier, and more logical answer: Without an experiencer, can experience exist? And without experience, can an experiencer exist? They are like two different sides of one existence; combined, both form existence as a whole. So, you are already in oneness from birth to death because experience and the experiencer are always there. One more thing: it is also sometimes called zero or nothingness. The reason behind this i
-
Does secular society still believe in original sin?
One of the funniest things about modern secular culture is that it absolutely still believes in original sin. It just refuses to call it that because theological language makes educated people uncomfortable. Listen to how modern institutions describe human beings. We are governed by unconscious bias, shaped by childhood conditioning, manipulated by algorithms, trapped in dopamine loops, distorted by social incentives, blinded by ideology, and mostly incapable of seeing our own motivations…
-
Why does Silicon Valley talk about death like it's a software bug?
One of the clearest signs that modern secular elite culture is uneasy about death is how Silicon Valley talks about it. The human body is treated like legacy hardware waiting for an upgrade. In place of acceptance, you get optimization: longevity startups, cryonics, extreme biohacking, and constant speculation about whether enough computation and biotech might eventually defeat death itself. Tech billionaires talk with pride about potentially transferring their consciousness to a computer, as…
-
Should we judge Christianity against what came before it, not against what it built?
One of the stranger habits of modern discussion is that Christianity is often judged exclusively against twenty-first-century moral standards while its alternatives are judged against the Christianity that helped shape those standards in the first place. This does not mean Christianity is innocent of wrongdoing. Religious wars happened. Churches accumulated power. Christians persecuted one another. Any honest reading of history has to acknowledge that. The question is whether Christianity made…
-
Can Buddhist detachment really be the root of a good moral system?
One thing I have never been able to shake about Buddhism is that its moral vision seems to rest on a foundation that I regard as fundamentally mistaken. I am not talking about all the virtues it encourages. Non-violence is good, Self-control is good, patience is good. A refusal to be consumed by greed or anger is obviously good. Christians should be able to acknowledge virtues wherever they find them. My concern is with the principle underneath those virtues.
-
Should we stop gatekeeping who counts as a real Christian?
Something occurred to me today. For centuries, especially in the English-speaking world, Catholics were often portrayed as superstitious, anti-intellectual, hostile to freedom, and blindly obedient to authority. Some of that came from real conflicts. Some of it came from centuries of Protestant polemics and what historians call the Black Legend. Either way, the image became deeply embedded in Western culture.
-
How are we conscious?
I had a daunting realization that hits me when I was in the middle of something. And why understanding metacognitive could easily break the perspective of your own. (this post is me just dumping my random thought here... because why not)
-
Is simulation theory just theism with extra steps?
One of the funniest intellectual developments of the last decade is watching aggressively secular people reinvent religion using computer terminology and then acting like this makes the idea more rational. Simulation theory is the clearest example. The basic concept is familiar by now, but I'll summarize: our universe might be an artificial simulation created by a vastly more advanced intelligence. Reality is likely programmed. Consciousness could exist inside a designed system. The laws of…
Public
19 conversations
22 thoughts
19 upvotes
0 downvotes
1 series
Just a experiment of self realisation or you can say consciousness....