Philosophy is the attempt to view life from the outside, from the inside. Quite difficult and possibly neverending as the subject and object are one and the same, and ever changing.

Consciousness is a state of being. It cannot be quantified. It is.

A given individual Mind has its own set of experiences, which cannot be quantified.

Forget about trying to quantify life. It is what it is and it's continuously changing.

Many misunderstood him as being mystical. — Alexandros

One has to go to places that are "scientifically" unacceptable in order to understand the nature of Life. Science moves in the direction of organizing material, while life is that what organizes the material. The idea that a human is a "computer", illustrates how daffy and wrongheaded science has become. People like Jung have to walk the fine line between honesty and acceptability. However, in one of his guys 1957 BBC interview he says the psyche is not confined to time and space, which is quite obvious to anyone who dreams.

I like those two ideas though. I think they are relevant today. — Caleb Mercado

They are interesting as a popular reference point for discussion. However, as a cohesive description of the nature of the human experience, they are wanting. Lots of dots with no connections. I short book that tightly and concisely explained his ideas would have be nice, but it probably wasn't possible.

I quoted you.

You shouldn’t be too quick too throw away jung. I think he had an iq of 200. — Caleb Mercado

He had some interesting ideas. However, they are disheveled, without cohesiveness. He went wrong when he turned out into a business. Money always corrupts.

You have that quite wrong. If one is to accept the idea of instincts, it means there are these structures of behavior or possibilities of behavior that you are born into. — Valentinus

Correct. Jung avoided the obvious explanation. Probably had to.

There are instincts and tendencies — Alexandros

Instincts is a word. When viewed from a specific philosophers'/energetic/spiritual perspective, it is possible to explain instincts as habits, both at a collective and individual level. Briefly, just view instincts as formed memory behavioral wave patterns. In this manner, instincts are no different than any other behavioral pattern, albeit much older, and therefore much, much more difficult to change.

The eye-opener for me was when I discussed Jung with Jung psychotherapists, none of them could really discuss his ideas and .. none of them used any of techniques. They just talk to people. Nice living.

This idea of unconscious has really led the understanding of human nature astray for all too long, though digging into it has been very lucrative for psychotherapists.

There are learned habits and habits we are learning. You don't need to dig a mile deep and pay someone to understand your unhealthy habits. All you need is to become aware that they are unhealthy, and try to replace them. However, habits once formed are darn difficult to change.

As for the collective unconscious, yes, there are species habits, formed over eons (e.g. breathing) and which we all share as a species morphic field.

Yes, it is more straightforward - but that doesn't make it true.
I'm not saying that the alternate is guaranteed to be true either, but it is a possibility driven by evidence. — Gary Enfield

It avoids the issues associated with dualism, i.e. how do they interact?

The lack of clarity in there verses is most likely the result of a incorrect perspective of the translator out reader. When viewed as a set of fables or hymns of an ancient people, them one can see that it is but much different from the kinds of spiritual writings and thoughts that have always been present in all cultures. It is good marketing to try to make it more than that, but more understandable if one doesn't.

It's like Yin and Yang. Two sides of the same coin, who work together to gain wealth and steal from those who create wealth.

The answer to your question lies in Spirituality, not philosophy. Yes, Life and Death are an endless cycle, just like Sleep and Awake. We move within these cycles to learn and rest, like a pendulum. We are time, and memory is what we are, what we have experienced, and what we are becoming. It is like the Light from a star. It never dies, just changes.

Yes. :)

Of course, out mind can create movement in our own body, but can it make movement beyond that, with use of our physical body. Also, this happens all of the time. The horror that the Wicked Witch of the East caused amoung millions of children. The comfort that a smile from one's partner can bring. Or the sense of hurt that a scowl from a parent might bring. Or the love that a quiet look from a pet gives to stop many. This is how Life communicates with each other. By feelings. Sending a rocket into space is nothing compared to the exchange of human emotions.

It is possible trust there was not one author of the Dao De Jing (I hold this view), but rather it is a conglomeration of sayings, thoughts, and stories, that were gathered over time. One can bring that the Bible is the revealed Word, or a collection from many authors over a period of time. Ditto for Shakespeare. For me, the Dao De Jing seems to be a collection chants, stories, and fables, all provoking different insights, and possibly deeper wisdom.

The concept of Mind-Brain is Is totally obsolete. It is now known that the "enteric brain" communicates bidirectional with the "other brain". In time, science will discover that every part of the body (which is largely microbes) is communicating with every other part via the nervous system. In effect, the body is a wholistic Mind. But it is but neurons creating a field. It is the Mind communicating via neurons. Science mistakenly continues on with the physical bias, because that is all science can operate on. It's a practical, but limiting viewpoint, and in some instances leads to dangerous conclusions.

So then if we took a "snapshot" of this very moment with it's totality, that being: — unintelligiblekai

You cannot, but you can imagine it. Time is what is and what is unfolding. There is no traveling in time, only change that we feel, like molding a piece of clay.

Time feels fluid. The time between falling asleep and awakening, feels instaneous. Time seems to be missing while asleep. When recalling past events, time feels compressed. When experiencing time as acting upon some present activity, there doesn't appear to any time, but only in comparison do we become aware of the time that has passed. The future may feel very far way, or it may feel far too close.

Time is what we have to discover, experiment, create, and learn. It is not long or short. It is the memories were have, what we are having, and what may be, or might have been. We are time, and it never ends.

Buddhism, like all spiritual pursuits, is as diverse and the number of humans who practice it. There is no Buddhist epistemology. Just be aware of desires, and practice moderation. Avoid excesses. There rest is about discovery and learning. There are no right and wrong paths. Just choices.

Why are you worried about where I start? — James Riley

Start where you want. I answered you the best I can.

Rocks do have memory which is extremely persistent. It also has some internal "self" movement, albeit ever so sight, in the form of radioactive decay. Very slight, but there.

It is my understanding that, in a hologram, each piece contains the whole. That certainly isn't true of the ocean. — T Clark

The ocean is the wave, the wave is the ocean. There cannot be any distinction between the two.

From what I read about the implicate order, it sounds very much like Taoism. The difference to me is that the Tao is metaphysics while Bohm claims the implicate order is physical reality. — T Clark

One would expect them to be similar, since they are describing the same thing. There difference is in how they express the image. Any physicist who is interested in discovering the nature of nature will ground their thoughts on some metaphysical model. Many quantum physicists have some metaphysical model that they discuss. Schrodinger had, and de Broglie wrote about his.

All I asked for was a book; one point in a journey. "No book", and "no point in the journey" would have answered my question and sent me off on a journey without books, in search of clues, or not. Like I said, I guess I'll wait until there is a point in the journey. — James Riley

I offered you a video as a starting point. In life, one cannot understand anything without exploration. Only universities offer such myths. There is no simple way no explain a holographic conception of the universe. You can start somewhere, and if you are curious enough about the subject, you keep searching, and not just in books. You are trying to understand the nature of nature. That takes work.

So what are you doing here?

I understand what it's like to not know a subject well enough to explain it to others. Sometimes books are a good way to share knowledge, or so I've heard. — James Riley

They are just one point in a journey. They are actually quite wanting because one cannot express an experience in words. However, they can provide clues.

As I said in my prior message to you, it takes exploration with skillful observation. This is learned with practice. One doesn't become a captain of a ship by reading books or chatting.

Like a yogi on a mountain top. — James Riley

Not at all. I explore by actually experiencing and observing all aspects of life. I imagine sitting on a mountain might be sufficient, but I doubt it. I am quite sure just reading what others have written is equally insufficient.

I've been exploring for decades. Understanding takes time and patience.

What's the best lay-explanation (dumbed-down) book I could get to address the holographic model? Preferably with pictures and charts. Thanks. — James Riley

I'm going to fall you, because dumb down explanations, say nothing and answer no questions. But, I can recommend this video and this series as a starting point for highly qualitative exploration. All relevant ideas, including Bohm's, are explored in this series. I go back to it many times, because Robbins is a genius and has packed an enormous amount of ingenuity into his presentations. Just remember, were are not living "in" a holographic field, we are integrated into the fabric by virtue of shared consciousness.

https://youtu.be/RtuxTXEhj3A

How would string theory play in to that, or would it, or could it? — James Riley

I think it was interesting, but a dead end. The interesting part was that "matter" is vibrational. However, a holographic model opens up entirely new realms of thinking, which turns classical thinking upside down, which is what I like about it. Science is 180° wrong in the way it views nature and life.

"Particles" in the Bohm-de Broglie model are areas of high energy concentration. The way I view it is, Mind is concentrating itself and creating "matter", which it feels as solidity.

Just to clarify for you or others, in response to some of the discussion you had yesterday, my own understanding of Bohm's actual idea of the implications order is not as an actual entity as such. He is not an idealist like Berkeley, but just sees mind and body as being beyond duality. I don't think that means that mind or body are more real. — Jack Cummins

Bohm indicated that his model leaves open the possibility of consciousness imbued in the Implicate Order. Bohm could only go do far, as he was already ostracized by the "scientific" community for refuting von Neumann, which was heretical. Instead of receiving a Nobel Prize, he was banished.

What Bohm missed was the idea that the Universe was holographic in nature. This is the game changer. His idea that quantum was waves without any collapse (de Broglie saw particles as instaneous eruptions in waves), ended the need for dualism and any need to refer to the idea of particles/matter. It quickly ended all paradoxes, and opened enormous possibilities for new studies based upon instaneous action at a distance. Bell's Theorem and subsequent experiments relating to entanglement and action at a distance, were all based upon Bohm's work.

Wu wei is the state of being between motion. It just happens, such as when one falls asleep, or when one dies, prior to re-awakening. Wu wei just happens. You can't do it. When practicing Taiji, one may reach a state of complete relaxation, and then on its own, your arms begin to move. No willpower. You can't understand Wu Wei by trying to understand it. You just have to allow it to happen when it happens. Patience. It may take decades. It's very interesting, but not necessary.

So you haven't a clue what you're talking about – well I do appreciate the confirmation; but I'd already suspected as much. My questions are "correct" only in so far as they 'smoked you out' of that Platonic cave for a moment. After all, "mind is quanta" and quanta are shadows, therefore mind is shadow, right? ... so the Sun (i.e. light of the real) is otherwise, that is, it's not mind. :clap: Don't bother objecting, Mondo, the implications of your previous posts already say enough to exorcise my fleeting interest in your Berkeleyan redux. — 180 Proof

Wasted my time. Shrug.

That's what I keep asking you – how? What's the mechanism? Saying "mind is quanta" says nothing more than informative than e.g. names are words. — 180 Proof

How does quanta form into materiality? How does Mind create a sense of materiality? Maybe not in this lifetime. Be satisfied that you are now asking the correct questions.

You need to drop the notion of materiality. Everything is quanta waves. The real question is how does the mind create sensations, e.g. sensations of solidity.

Yeah, but how? What's the mechanism? — 180 Proof

Mind and Quanta are the same. It creates using itself.

If everything is mind, what's the mechanism by which it manifests illusions to fool its individual selves that, say, there is more-than-mind (e.g. mass, light, spacetime)? — 180 Proof

Mind is just exploring, learning just creating many different things. Some of them are puzzles, like a magicians act. All to explore new ways of to manifest itself.

I agree with you that the TTC is about the experience, not the words. You say there is not gap, but for me there is. I have a sense for the experience of the Tao and obviously I experience the 10,000 things, but it is the step between that I am searching for. How non-being becomes being. How the nameless becomes the named. — T Clark

There is no non-being. It is Mind that begins to create. Think of drawiing without lifting the pencil. You begin to create shapes in a never ending spiral of waves.