Are there any books about this? I think any book about it would have to be short, because there isn't that much to say. Or maybe there's more to say than I think, because of all the questions it to which it can lead. Why am I here? and stuff like that. It wouldn't be about answering the questions (that would be religion!), but about just being in that state of not-knowing. — ScottVal
I'm not even sure what branch of philosophy this is; I stuck it in "mind" for lack of something better. Maybe it's metaphysics, or not philosophy at all. Psychology? — ScottVal
it can be hard to get to the real "bone" of Zen philosophy and separate it from the Buddhist rituals, which don't interest me so much — ScottVal
.There can also be a feeling that it's amazing that I (or you, or the world) exists at all.
.One can contemplate the possibility that the world never came into being at all
.I'm not even sure what branch of philosophy this is; I stuck it in "mind" for lack of something better. Maybe it's metaphysics
.Are there any books about this? I think any book about it would have to be short, because there isn't that much to say.
.Or maybe there's more to say than I think,
.…because of all the questions it to which it can lead.
.Why am I here?
.…and stuff like that. It wouldn't be about answering the questions (that would be religion!), but about just being in that state of not-knowing.
.I had first had this experience when I was about fourteen, and had that feeling of being blown away, that I (we, the world) exist at all.
.The issue I may have with consciousness being primary is that the physical universe came first; a lifeless universe. Then life appeared at some point, yada yada, ultimately my parents appeared, finally I was conceived, my brain developed, my mind developed, and my consciousness developed. So how is it primary?
This reminds me of the idea that I am the creator of my own reality — ScottVal
, and this universe I create has to be consistent
, etc., etc.; isn't that solipsism?
It also reminds me of the pop-metaphysics-spirituality of Jane Roberts (1929-84) and others.
Good stuff, but the issue I may have with consciousness being primary is that the physical universe came first; a lifeless universe. Then life appeared at some point, yada yada, ultimately my parents appeared, finally I was conceived, my brain developed, my mind developed, and my consciousness developed. So how is it primary? — ScottVal
I agree that it is somewhat absurd (a bit of a leap of faith) to believe that consciousness came from non-consciousness. You seem to be also saying the opposite, that it is absurd to consider consciousness (subjectivity) begetting the objective (non-consciousness). — ScottVal
By virtue of the fact that consciousness is always consciousness of something, — Blue Lux
..
I guess it's kind of trendy to say "I am the creator of my reality," but I agree that the wording is a bit disagreeable!
So yes, that astoundingness often occurs to me often too. People reasonably object to my metaphysical explanation because obviously the mystery remains, and so I can’t call it a complete explanation, and, as I often say, I don’t believe that Reality is explainable.
.
But I feel that it’s desirable and possible to avoid brute-facts and assumptions at the physical and metaphysical levels. No one anymore expects brute facts (…other than the Materialist’s big brute-fact), or contraventions of established physical law, at the physical level. Then why expect a brute-fact at the verbal, describable metaphysical level? However unexplainable it all must ultimately be, that doesn’t mean it has to not make sense logically at the describable level.
.
Materialism posits a brute-fact at the physical and metaphysical levels, and that isn’t necessary.
-----------------------------------------
Maybe I didn’t fully answer what you said in regards to how Consciousness could be primary, when we’re a product of the physical world.
.
As I mentioned, this physical world that we’re the product of is part of a complementarity consisting of us the experiencer, and our “physical” surroundings, the setting of our experience-story.
.
As such, because there are no mutually-inconsistent facts, our experience mustn’t be inconsistent with there having been physical events, before our birth, leading to our birth. Those events include such things as the day our parents met, and the formation of the Earth, etc.
.
Did those things happen? It’s an experience story, and those things obviously didn’t happen in our experience. But our experience can’t be inconsistent with there having been physical events that produced us.
.
Conventionally we say that those things did happen, in the sense that our experience can’t be inconsistent with such things having happened in the physical world that is the setting for our experience-story.
.
But really all that we know is from our experience, and there’s no reason to say that we and our experience aren’t central and primary.
.
If someone advocates Materialism, then ask them why there’s this Material world.
.
Regarding uncontroversially inevitable systems of abstract facts: As I mentioned, there of course are 1) objective world-stories; and 2) there are subjective experience-stories. Which of those is about your experience? Which of those is of and for you? Which is what you perceive?
.
So:
1. The systems of abstract facts are inevitable, and they include objective world-stories and subjective experience-stories.
.
2. Among those, a subjective story is your experience.
------------------------------------
Yes, these matters are especially of interest due to the undeniable temporariness of this life. Because this life is going to reach an end, it’s of interest what else there is, and what it’s going to be like when that time arrives, as it undeniably will.
.
Someone could say “You want there to be something else, but that’s wishful-thinking, that there’s something other than this life.” Well, if there’s one thing for sure, it’s that this life is going to end, and undeniably this particular phase is followed by something other than itself. It’s therefore of interest, and reasonable to discuss, what else there is, and what the end of this temporary phase will be like.
.
Michael Ossipoff
.I agree it's misleading to say "I am the creator of my reality." It's fashionable in certain spiritualist circles to say this. Just because I am the protagonist of my story doesn't mean I was in control of everything which happened or everything which will happen.
.I guess in a looser sense you can say you created your world, in the sense that you made your life what it is out of the raw materials you were given. But even that is debatable!
.I'm glad you see and feel how astounding it is, that this world exists, and I agree that it is hard to find people willing to talk about this. It's great to find a kindred spirit. It should not matter what belief system you follow, it is still amazing that any of this exists at all.
.Unfortunately certain fanatical religions may have the effect of dulling one's mind to the wonder of it all.
.I haven't seen "Wolf," but I'll try to check it out.
.I like the idea that "each" of us is a point of view whereby the universe obverses itself, "feels" itself from the inside, experiences itself.
.And I like the idea that each point of view provides a different story.
.And within each story we can feel that amazement, that all of this can possibly exist. Maybe that is the highest experience you can have, even if you have an out-of-body experience, or if you are a super-hero, or a super-celebrity, or a mega-billionaire, or live beyond death, you can still be amazed that any of this exists at all.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.