Anatta and nonlocal panpsychism

[Black Rose]

The reason the I have experiences is because of brain states. So if I am happy or sad or hungry or thirsty, it is because electrons are flowing in the correct circuits. When no electrons are flowing there is nothing but the atoms remain but the flow has not resumed. What is my state at that point. The I exists no where but the atoms have spread.

Then there is the presence that is awareness of different parts of the entity in totality. So what the I knows is this awareness of that entity. If the presence can exist when the electrons are flowing can the presence exist when they are apart, for they are already apart, as separated as water drops in a bowl. Only by their synchronization do they respond in unison but this is not because they are connected. So even the distance does not matter for they are not in the unison of the totality which the I has awareness of.

The anatta is the separation of electrons in death. So where is the I if separation is realized. Nothing has changed but for that which is already separated to remain separated in a different pattern of diffusion. So who is to say when the flow stops the I is dissolved. The I is not in the separation but forms from the totality and direction in which electrons flow. Everything remains equal in its totality.

I have had past forms with my body being composed of 100% different atoms that are in separation even as when they were inside me. Nothing stops the electron flow and yet that which is separated is united in awareness. So what happens at death is the same as which happen in life, a unified awareness of being.

 

[DIALECTIC]

When death occurs, the "transmission" stops... Then finds a new a new receiver...
Question is: is there such a thing as a local transmission as opposed to (or maybe leading to) a global transmission, in other words do we pretty much restart from when we stopped or do we start from fresh again (which would suck) ?

 

[Black Rose]

If it is flowing from Source it has continuity?

 

[nanook]

I'm not sure if i understand you.


this would be my view (and i guess it's my take on integral evolutionary panentheism):

what happens in human life is what happened prior, after or elsewhere plus something else.

in death you have a totality that extends beyond the brain, it includes the universe and it is awareness. in life you have a _particular_ dynamic pattern of process, carried by what you call 'synchronization', through a _particular_ flowpattern of electrons. it's the ghost in the machine, it's the I, and it's lost with death. awareness isn't. and electrons keep flowing in all sort of different patterns, but without forming an I, except elsewhere or later, in another living brain.

when the I pattern is present, it's synchronizing nature works like a distraction, this is how it appears to limit awareness from the rest of the cosmos to what's present in the body and brain. it' absorbs spirit or awareness into itself, catches it in a deeply nested loop. so, the I pattern is substantially made out of awareness, but it's defined not by 'substance', but by activity.



perhaps we are using words differently, sometimes awareness is called the "I AM" but also the NOSELF. what i call I is the human self, the small self, a sense of separated focus.

 

[Black Rose]

@nanook

Must this awareness be of some qualia? is the brain a filter for qualia such as emotions.

 

[nanook]

i never got deeply into the official definition of the word qualia, i'll translate it as 'qualities know to us'.

i mean 'spirit' aka reality aka time and space aka everything is essentially aware, i wouldn't say that awareness is a particular quality of spirit as that would imply that it's optional and one of many other possible qualities, it's not optional and is too basic to be labeled that way. and 'spirit' includes all forms or qualities and brings awareness into them, but it's not necessarily bringing reflection (self-awareness) into them, reflexion comes from the complexity of the movement inside of the particular forms, so a stone is pretty darn stupid, it's awareness being rather stoned, in animals awareness is dreaming, in us it can do what we might call awake, creating a reflective sense of I (ego being lost) and later projecting it back onto itself (I - AMness), back onto it's most essential nature (NOSELF/spirit). so the brain or any reflection/complexity of process is like a modulator of awareness or spirit. the word modulation seems closer than filtering.

i don't really get the "brains are radio receivers to higher selves" worldview (wherein the word filtering is often used), it seems to imply too much of a separation between material and spiritual dimensions.

 

[Black Rose]

What would hyper self awareness be? DMT?
How is the I reconsolidated to what it was before birth? Oneness with everything?

 

[nanook]

altered brain states are just deeper (more basic) reflections, they are always a mixture of the subject and the absolute, while the subjective state is temporal, even though it often feels eternal, due to the absolute quality mixed in. (there, now i called it quality, contradicting myself)

all depth is interpreted, spirit can not be known by a human being in general or in it's entirety, nor does the basic awareness of spirit ever amount to any "knowing" (of it's entirety) of sorts, spirit can only know himself through a human (or similar) being in a particular subjective manner, while that being is having a particular deeper state or what is called awakening, which is a gross reduction of all the distracting relative reflections, which leaves us with only a basic and still typically human (subjective) root reflection, while the rest of intelligence becomes somewhat more intuitive than reflective (twisted), it's sometimes called undivided self. i believe, this root reflection is necessary to keep the 'intuition' or 'the undivided self' state together/synchronized and i'm afraid it will die. since even the 'awake being' knows only one subjective perspektiv of spirit onto itself (including it's wordy manifestation and it's essential quality) it is called 'unique self' (in integral theory).

there is no "separate self" means that no reflective perspective will ever be independent from the world of form and thus from time, separate from causality. any perspective (whether it's called higher self or whatever) is a temporal phenomenon that occurs to spirit and it's always utterly unique, as much as it may seem generic in features ("I am you"). we are god and we are reflection and as reflexion we can never meet in time and space, except through wordy dialogue, through our reflections extending through body and language and mixing up. so the saying is very ironic. we are sort of separate from each other, because we are so unique and we must remain unique (different) because we can't be reflective separately from causality.

i can't seem to make up my mind on whether reflexion should be written with x or c, hell i might even throw in a t somewhere

 

[Black Rose]

I know that I don't have a soul that is annihilated in death. Only my reflection will cease. Something will still have presence. not the me, mine, or I but that nonself that does not die. But to become it I will keep transformation different than human form yet still be.

 

[nanook]

well you are always the noself, next to whatever else you are. and what if there is like just one soul though, like a landcape of soul-stuff for all sentient beings, and what you call "your" soul is just the facettes of it, that you're familiar with atm, cuz they resonate with the soul facets that are involved into your current incarnation, atm. "the lord is the one and only transmigrator" (incarnator) is one of those sayings.

either i'm too drunk or the grammar of your last sentence is too drunk.