We know the Mind does these things but the question is How does it do it? — SteveKlinko

Experience, decision and act are simply the properties of mind. We cannot understand how they work. Take the obvious example, how does decision work?

The only fact that we have is that experience exists. The proof for existence of other things outside and inside is difficult if not impossible.

It is the mind which experience the Qualia, electromagnetic wave in a brain. It is mind that decides and act on matter too.

I'm not sure what view you're attributing to the materialists here. — Cabbage Farmer

Yes, it is.

I've never heard a materialist claim that consciousness is constituted by any sort of matter in any sort of motion. I'll agree they say that very specific sorts of matter in very specific sorts of motion constitute consciousness. But that claim's not the same as the less discriminate one you've sought to pin on the materialists in generating this farfetched argument. — Cabbage Farmer

Materialist simply claiming that consciousness is the result of specific motion of matter.

Consciousness is not personal or local, "consciousness" describes a process that includes the brain but is not limited to it - one's consciousness of an external object is a particular ad hoc physical process that includes the object, that induces it to exist in a way it wouldn't on its own, or in its interaction with some other object. — gurugeorge

Consciousness is personal and local. Are you aware of my experiences?

If you're a materialist, then the world has parts, parts meaning you and other objects. Your consciousness must necessarily be in the same form -- it obeys space-time principle. It is local and individual. This is not negotiable. You can't argue your way out of this. I don't know why we keep beating around the bush. — Caldwell

My argument is on two bases. (1) World is made of parts, electron, proton, etc and (2) These parts interact with each other. This means that there is one process which tells you the state of the system, motion of all particles. This means that there should be one consciousness if consciousness is the result of motion of particles.

Are you saying Socialism is possible, or are you saying it is never possible? — René Descartes

I am saying it is possible given proper education.

You said: So the manifold is consciousness. I said, no. They are not identical. Consciousness is, necessarily, individual in the world of materialist. — Caldwell

Did you read this post?

What do you mean? — René Descartes

Which part of my sentence do you have a problem with?

Is consciousness nothing more than a particular method of memory access? — Tyler

No, consciousness is about having ability to experience.

The problem is that we know the purpose, finding meaning, but we can get it.

The point is whether the act of killing is right or wrong objectively, mean absolutely. Everything is matter of situation. And yes, there can be an answer for any situation. That however doesn't impose anything objectively, the act is wrong always.

Yes, f(x) could exist mentally. Like killing people are wrong. But you cannot deny that y(x) cannot exist. Therefore there is nothing objective as far as things depends on situation. Like killing people is right if their existence due to huge population causes catastrophe.

The only solution to that is socialism which is not possible without proper education.

The reality could be different and things are matter of situation, therefore objective morality does not exist.

We can measure people decision unless we pool even in that case people might change their mind.

Is this a new question? Because in your opening post, you took it for granted there is consciousness. You were asking for why consciousness is local/or individual, not a streaming live on anywhere.
So, explain this question to me. Are you asking the cause of consciousness? — Caldwell

Well, consciousness is either the result of matter activity or intrinsic property of matter. There is no other option around. You were talking about a manifold. I asked whether this manifold is manifold of consciousness. You answered no. Then the only solution is that consciousness is the result of motion of manifold. This leads to the problem mentioned in OP.

I am afraid that I cannot understand what you are trying to say. Could you please rephrase it?

No. — Caldwell

So where do you get the consciousness from?

Basically, Mind creates waves (Yin/Yang) and starts moving the waves with energy (Qi) and hence begins creation. Spot on and only 2500 years ago. — Rich

So Mind creates waves/minds? And Mind is ocean?

There are free PDF files available for all of Henri Bergson's works, his most famous being Creative Evolution. For a very good explanation just watch Stephen Robbins' videos on YouTube. — Rich

Thanks.

The story of the beginning from the Dao De Jing. — Rich

Could you please elaborate on that?

I've mentioned Bergson quite often so I figure if someone is interested they will read him directly, which is the only way to learn and develop one's own metaphysical ontology. What I am describing is mine in which draws from many sources including my own practices as well as my own thoughts. — Rich

Can I have any reference?

No. Manifold -- containing different parts. Not one continuous existence. Though the parts may interact, they do not occupy the same space and time... — Caldwell

So the manifold is consciousness?

The Tao begot one. (Mind begins to move)
One begot two. (Yin/Yang, positive/negative, opposites, a wave form
Two begot three. (Yin/Yang/Qi, polarity and energy, a moving wave form, mind/will
And three begot the ten thousand things. (Spiraling, vibrating waves create everything.

The ten thousand things carry yin and embrace yang. (Everything is composed of moving waves)
They achieve harmony by combining these forces. — Rich

What is this?

So what is the source of creation of consciousness? Matter field?

Hey, wait a minute there. I am imperfect, does that mean that I have no chance of changing.
Man, I am so screwed. — Sir2u

If you become perfect then it you could not make a irrational act and create imperfect creation. That is against divine justice. It is logically impossible. The same is true if Perfection, God, is the first place.

Essentially, it could become perfect again upon its completion or re-completion. — Lone Wolf

If creation could become perfect then we have new Gods. So what is the purpose of not creating Gods in the first place.

So perfection is not the end
— bahman

The end of what? — Sir2u

The end at which you reach to perfection, if this practically possible.

and you need to say what is wrong with my argument.
— bahman

I doubt that there is anything wrong with your argument. — Sir2u

If my argument is correct then God cannot create imperfection.

There are similarities in differences and differences in similarities as there are between vapor and ice. The experiencer and subject are the eyes looking upon the body. — Rich

So are you saying that force filed is conscious of us too?

Okay, so what do you tell the materialists? How do you resolve it? Tell the materialists that since process is not identical with the particles, then necessarily, by claiming there are particles, they admit to space-time existence. Since they admit to space-time existence, then the world is a manifold. And what do you get in world with parts, with atoms, with which you create a picture of reality? Individuation of consciousness. — Caldwell

Is the manifold continuous?

No, they are not equivalent. They can only be converted to each other. We know this by fact, there is an experiencer and a subject of experience.

Of course he can, he created the perfect mistake. We are the ones that see it as imperfection. — Sir2u

So perfection is not the end and you need to say what is wrong with my argument.

They are fundamentally different vibrations that we are experiencing. Each with its own form and intensity that it's embedded in the fabric of the (holographic) universe. In a sense, everything is feeling. — Rich

There are two fields in nature: (1) Matter and (2) Forces. Are you saying that Qualia is byproduct of force field? There is no other option.

We should search for meaning.

And what is the stuff we experience, Qualia? Illusion created by mind?