Yes Punshhh, you are correct. I have only conceived of enlightenment as a sudden change in personality. I suppose it would be less traumatic if the change is extended over a number of years , and validated and reinforced within a community.

Also I suppose in the east If a person believed in a life force, and understood themselves as a node in a lineage of life, they would not be so far from being a nobody. The step to enlightenment wouldn't be as great, and this would mitigate the dissosiative personality and psychopathy problem, that a westerner would incur.

Is this the popular understanding in the east - that enlightenment entails a breakdown and a rebuilding of personality??

If so, and If this is the purpose of a Zen community / practice, I would be reluctant to enter into such a situation, as it seems little different to brainwashing.

If your enlightenment is not self driven, but results from the participation of a communal process, is it enlightenment at all, or is it a programming???

I hope I don't sound disrespectful - this is the philosophy I respect above all others, but I feel everything deserves rigorous scrutiny.

Finally can anybody tell me the difference between enlightenment, and the delusion that you are enlightened???

Because they say the origin of all suffering is (inevitably unfulfilled) desires, so giving up trying to control things, giving up desires and just accepting everything, makes you immune to suffering. So they say. — Pfhorrest

I think, its not only desires / social illusions / delusions that need to be broken down - it is indeed personality that needs to be broken down. You have to let go of your values, convictions, notions of meaning, and love. You have to let go of everything until you become a nobody who believes in nothing.

Everything is something to somebody, but everything is nothing to nobody.

If you reach this point, from a western perspective, you become quite insane! Are you a dissociative personality disorder, or are you a psychopath? Certainly you are experiencing a personality crisis!

I'm told in certain Buddhist orders this is a guided process that takes 3 years - the insanity lasts 3 years!

I can see how within this state of mind the absurdity of the world would be clear, the idea that we create our own reality would be proven experientially, and the reality / illusions of society would be crystal clear. As well the notion that we are free to create our own reality - indeed condemned to it - so that being the case it makes sense to create for your self a joyous reality. At the same time you would understand that you ultimately can have no confidence in whatever reality you do create, so exploration of your consciousness becomes the final frontier

Everything is something to somebody, but everything is nothing to nobody.

I'm not sure whether you are seeking validation or answers?

It seems to me you have had a very deep insight into your consciousness. I am no expert, but I understand all that you and Possibility are saying and agree with you both. Unlike possibility though, you seem not to be integrating your experience into your normal existence?

Buddhist philosophy ( without the religion / ritual / costume ) describes your current situation as a time of re- birthing. It is normally a guided process that on average takes 3 years.

My solution to the problem you pose in the nothingness is that there is still an energy that defines you.
This energy also created the Big bang , the galaxies, stars, planets, the Earth, and life on Earth and ultimately you.The Big Bang is the source of all the energy in our Universe, It has fragmented but continues to drive all the processes in the universe - including you. It seems , to me, consciousness ( or a large part of consciousness ) is this energy, and you have had an insight into it.

Hope this helps. I love reading your insights.

I wonder about this. If meaning is created by humankind, what put within humankind the desire to have meaning. In an otherwise cold, dead, universe, it has no value or purpose. In fact, if anything, it's detrimental to us being a symbiotic part of the natural world. Yet we seek it. I have no idea why. — runbounder

The culture you grew up in.
Not a dead / live or otherwise universe - a nothing universe - very nice place to be in.

I do tend to lean towards buddhist teachings. They tackle this subject much better than other faiths. Not to mention, my main spiritual mentor is a buddhist. I haven't come across any readings/teachings that cover this exact topic, though. — runbounder

The issue of consciousness is what Buddha tackled

@runbounder

You seem to be reflecting on the difficulties of your consciousness.
I would suggest you will not find solutions by fixating on its detail.

For instance - meaning. Meaning is a human social construct, likely developed some ways along the road of our evolution. It dose not exist in nature. What use for meaning dose a bird have?

Imagine you lived on a deserted island and you knew you could never be rescued, what use would you have for meaning? I think to continue life would be meaningful and not much more beyond that.

Of course, in another sense, you are already living on a deserted island with no hope of rescue.


Buddhism is the only complete philosophy of consciousness. They have been dwelling on this stuff for 5000 years .There is a secular variety.

b

Zelebg — Zelebg

Thanks for the link. It seems we live in a virtual reality:smile:

You might be interested in this
I haven't read him, but from the blurb it seems on the money.However like you I like to think these things through myself - even if I am late on the scene. I can model consciousness fairly well, but not fully explain it - all avenues I've tried lead to Panpsychism, And I have recently realized Buddhism arrived there 5000 years ago, so am looking into secular Buddhism - should keep me busy for a few years. Cheers

Not only it can be simulated, but there is no other substrate in which consciousnes can exist but virtual. — Zelebg

This is very insightful, is this your idea?

I think the minimum you need for consciousness is intelligence and memory. Or CPU and RAM, and algorithm. The latest AI is self learning and programming – so that is a consciousness.

All living creatures are self learning and programming.

@Pantagruel

I'm a bit uncomfortable with esoteric stuff also, but I've independently formed a conception of consciousness,which I'm fairly confident in, and it agrees very well with Buddhist philosophy - I subsequently found out.

Also I've come across the opinion / fact that whilst in the west, consciousness is a recent consideration, in India it was first considered 5000 years ago, that was the first time the subconscious was conceived!
several hundred years ago they conceived the collective consciousness - but also 3 levels lower. They also have identified the super conscious and a number of levels higher. So I'm doing some research on all this stuff.

Theirs is a philosophy - it is logical and reasoned. - I have dismissed it off hand in the past thinking it would be like western religion, but I think now that I made a big mistake. Its very different.

It may be an integrated and unified philosophy of consciousness? But I am still learning and haven't formed a final view.

I’ve tried many mediums and forms to try and capture (for better use of a word) my experience in the world. But I feel like I’ve failed in every attempt. Whatever I do never quite makes it. Not that anyone would necessarily know that. But I’ve realised I’ll always fail because art is artifice, a synthetic version of my experience. How could it possibly succeed at capturing my experience? — Brett

Brett, If you do not mind me suggesting, you are describing your consciousnesses. Consciousness is a creator of reality - what we perceive reality to be , becomes our reality, and then we pervade that reality to others.By understanding consciousness, you can change your reality.

Now to explain the above in more conventional thought - I am still trying to get my head around consciousness . - You are searching for a language. All artists must find a way to express their particular sensibility ( consciousness ).The first part is to find a language.You wont find the language until you are settled in you thoughts.You will settle on your thoughts and find a language at the same time. At that point not only will you show your work, but you will insist on shouting it to the world.

I'm saying its all about consciousness. Principles, beauty, creativity, aesthetics being sub facets of consciousness.
I'm not saying there are better or worse ways to make art - and maybe I'm saying all art is equal - just that whatever we make reflects our consciousness. Always has, always will. We cant escape it.

Consciousness is a very broad term. The broadest there is- hence the only one that can define art.
We don't understand fully what consciousness is, but there is much material in other parts of the forum.

Panpsychism and Buddhism are the only complete theories of consciousness we have. They both suggest consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe. From this perspective consciousness takes on a much deeper meaning.

Brett put it well:

Art is humanities expression of itself.

Art gives us insight into the artist,



Art is a concrete manifestation of human thought – a manifestation into concrete form, of something that is ( ungrounded / virtual / computed / experienced emotionally / believed / valued / perceived / subconscious ) - consciousness

But, perhaps the closer we get to consciousness center, the more chance we have of cooperation?

Of course all humanity has to do this too - we are some ways off this :cry:

I think consciousness can defeat the problem of subgroup, competition, etc. It is why I'm interested in it.

The ultimate goal seems to be a letting go of everything.Then you are free, and united with all humanity?

Yes I think for consciousness - as an abstract concept - improving oneself would result in a self interested outcome - that would mostly impinge on another somehow. So I think its really respect that is the key?

Improving oneself requires a letting go.
In this world however , you then fall prey to the action of others?

I'd say humanity.

Yes,that is a very good point. Absolutely we must try our best.

I think what you say is very wise. It all boils down to consciousness.
But, in my mind, there is a problem there. Consciousness seems to be self interested - i cannot prove this but suspect it is true for us all. So the reality it creates. ( that we accept ) always favors the thinker - it would not aid survival otherwise.

So what seems to be happening in the forum is the reality of one consciousness conflicts with the reality of another consciousness.There is no getting over this impasse except for an individual to let go.

Only an enlightened person could do this, and would an enlightened person be on the forum at all?

Shakespeare wrote something like - "art is a mirror to nature". Perhaps he meant Human nature?

That something is art is arbitrarily deemed.It becomes art when you choose to say it is.

Of course - you are not going to put forward as art something arbitrary. though you have that freedom. You are going to put forward your best thought, your best painting, etc - the height of your consciousness - for everybody to scrutinize.

Art is information about the artists consciousness.

Thanks Brett, but I think its yours also now - you have taken it to places I never thought of :grin:

Yeah, who knows? Do you mind If i quote you outside of this forum ? I'm putting together a web site, and I really like the above post.

What I really like is you have extrapolated on it in ways I haven't thought of

You would not believe how big a smile I have on my face for you :rofl:

Thanks Brett, Its been a pleasure chatting.

Yes that is near enough

To disprove the definition I've proposed you need only produce one work of art that is not contained by it.

If you cant do that, then perhaps you should consider the validity of it.

Ultimately everything is about consciousness.

Everybody. I believe, we all have a different personally constructed definition of art. It reflects the height of our consciousness. And is very dear to us, and we must fight for it. Hence the confusion surrounding art.

But essentially we are not discussing art, but our consciousness of it. And I also believe the art world is not discussing art but its consciousness of it.This is really what the definition is about. It seeks to clarify what is going on. We are really discussing consciousness, and so is the art world.

How can you discuss art without a definition? What are you discussing?

I understand taking a walk as an expression of human consciousness and where one chooses to walk as information about the walker's consciousness. Walking as an expression of human consciousness is broad enough to capture all walking ever done - cave people walking to the present.

All meaningful acts are an expression of human consciousness.

Arne


What separates an art object and a non art object is that an art object has extra information - it is deemed to be art.It is an arbitrary extra bit of information, but results in art being put on a pedestal, this differentiates it from other aspects of human consciousness.

Glad to hear from you Arne - first serious challenge.

.

Punshhh my understanding of consciousness is very basic. There are people in this forum who's insights are far far deeper. It may be that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and that is why I posted here to test this definition. But I suspect it will be just a matter of time before everybody sees things as I do. But maybe not maybe your right.

On that note I must bow out.
This is the first time I have participated in an online discussion,and I now realize my etiquette is poor.I type with two fingers so left out the I believe and in my opinion in order to keep pace with posts. If I have offended anyone I sincerely apologize. It was not my intention.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. And mine is just one of many.

443 replies - wow

I believe
We cant say with certainty what art will be, because it is free to be whatever it wants to be, and in future it will be things we haven't conceived of yet.

But we can say with certainty that art will be information about the artists state of mind - for all of time across all cultures.

Where else can it originate except somebody's mind?

Whatever it tells us will be through the prism of somebodies mind.



So another Definition has occurred to me:

Art is information, through the prism of somebody's mind.

Art has no limits except the limits of our mind.

Our mind can be called consciousness.

Art is telling us lots of things - it is free to tell us whatever it wants- whatever can reside in the mind.

But human art will never tell us anything ever about what is out of reach of the mind.

Language / information -- art is telling us things.

I label it as information because recent developments in theoretical physics reduce everything down to information, but this is not universally agreed upon

I dont mean you personally Brett, I mean generally.