GENIUS FORUMS

The reason people deny solipsism is because the external world appears to be publicly verifiable, whilst dreams and hallucinations are private. When virtually all people agree that their experience is sufficiently similar, it is considered objective by most people. As W.T. Stace showed in his authoritative Mysticism and Philosophy, there is a similar unanimity in the primary characteristics of mystical experiences as reported in different cultures, ages, and countries across the world. In this respect, the only difference between sense experiences and mystical experiences is in the number of witnesses. Anyone can verify sense experiences, whilst only a few can verify mystical experiences. This may weaken the case, but it in no way changes the logic of the argument. It may reduce the probability of the conclusion, but the conclusion is sound and valid. Whilst nearly everyone would regard it as a certainty, on the basis of public verifiability alone, that the sense world exists outside of the individual mind, it is probable that mystics in mystical states of consciousness are in contact with an objective reality. Of course, the fact that all people who have experienced something agree in their accounts of the experience is not sufficient to prove its objectivity. Unanimity is only part of what constitutes objectivity. The other part, I think, is order, law and regularity. Dreams and hallucinations are disorderly. The fact that mystical experiences are both unanimous and orderly establishes a strong case for their objectivity.

Another reason for taking mystical experiences seriously as potentially objective rather than illusory subjective phenomena is the nature of consciousness itself. Consciousness is nonphysical and not reducible to biochemical phenomena. We know this on the basis of metaphysical arguments for the primacy of consciousness as the ground of all being; various interpretations of quantum physics in relation to the mind-body problem; the theory of holomovement, in which consciousness is conceived as an unconditioned act of perception, not grounded in biochemical structures; biologist rupert sheldrake's theory of morphogenetic fields; philosopher ervin laszlo's PSI field and his connectivity hypothesis; neuroscientist karl pribram's holonomic brain theory; evidence of paranormal activity; evidence of altered states of consciousness and psychedelics; the evidence of telepathy, precognition, retrocognition, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis; near death experiences, and out of body experiences. These lines of evidence, taken together, establish a very strong case for the nonphysical nature of consciousness. Hence when someone claims to have experienced mystical states of consciousness, unless we have reason to think him a charlatan, he ought to be taken seriously.

Of course, the strongest evidence is to have a mystical experience oneself. This can be achieved through years of spiritual discipline and meditation. For the convinced atheist, however, who would not submit to such discipline, I would recommend as a starting point the ingestion of 200-400 micrograms of lycergic acid, in conjunction with meditation and the proper spiritual guidance.

Didn't read your post cause I don't have time at the moment.

But solipsism itself is the ultimate philosophy, I still have had no ability to come up with a reason why I am not the only perspective in existence. All logic dissipates if I were, so logical reasons can't work to show otherwise. Now I am not saying it is the ultimate philosophy because it is undeniable, like many other philosophies are, but because once understood properly it sums up all of existence and my life to one thing: An endless dream I have no control over and know nothing about its origin. Sounds pretty right to me...

Although I have been living as if other peoples perspectives are real and they experience consciousness also, which is more logical to live by but can't be proven.

Also, all logic is false, there is the appearance of external world logic which is undeniable and constant. But when viewed from your single perspective, it becomes clear how shallow and illusory the logic we have attached to our experience is.

My brother took LSD and meditated and claims to have had such mystical experiences.

I personally have only been smoking marijuana and meditating which has had, from my view, the same mystical effects.

I have witnessed inner vision in a wakeful state, some call this simply lucid dreaming, but for philosophers it means a whole lot more.

Not to mention dreaming implies sleep. Being fully conscious of my experience, and at the time having been very detached from reality,(which I have found is a prerequisite for the quickest way to leave this reality and experience mystical states) I witnessed clear as day vision manifest in front of my eyes, and just as clearly watched this daylight vanish back to my view of blackness(eyes closed).

Not only was I able to think of fire, and then see this fire, but upon turning it toward me, I felt the massive shock and again returned to the darkness. Very similar to being shot in a dream, the only difference being I manifested the fire and chose to point it at me and watched its clear existence vanish.

Witnessing reality form consciously from the void is the height of mystical experience. The more one witnesses the forming of sensual experience the more one understands sensual experience.

Being your title states:

Objectivity of Mystical experiences,

what then would be the subject matter of such objectivity?

I ask this because should it be correct solipsism theories self is all which can be known, then the subject of one knowing them-self must be justified by what? which needs a subject to be objectified.

Should there be an answer to this question, and there is, then it is obvious there is Something to be known beyond self. This would mean solipsism is not the ultimate reasoning to stop expanding.

Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com

Hi IxTab,

Ixtab wrote:The other part, I think, is order, law and regularity. Dreams and hallucinations are disorderly. The fact that mystical experiences are both unanimous and orderly establishes a strong case for their objectivity.

What such experiences miss though is predictability. We can predict the sun goes up or a brick will fall. This alone creates a whole different order of events. Of course you could predict that something will happen when using a certain kind of psychedelic drug, but the content of the experience varies wildly on mood, experience, psychology, sobriety and so on. And can rarely be shared when it comes to specifics. And some people just freak out when perception of things (or themselves, or mood or all of the above) starts suddenly shifting.

Another reason for taking mystical experiences seriously as potentially objective rather than illusory subjective phenomena is the nature of consciousness itself. Consciousness is nonphysical and not reducible to biochemical phenomena. We know this on the basis of metaphysical arguments for the primacy of consciousness as the ground of all being; various interpretations of quantum physics in relation to the mind-body problem; the theory of holomovement, in which consciousness is conceived as an unconditioned act of perception, not grounded in biochemical structures; biologist rupert sheldrake's theory of morphogenetic fields; philosopher ervin laszlo's PSI field and his connectivity hypothesis; neuroscientist karl pribram's holonomic brain theory; evidence of paranormal activity; evidence of altered states of consciousness and psychedelics; the evidence of telepathy, precognition, retrocognition, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis; near death experiences, and out of body experiences. These lines of evidence, taken together, establish a very strong case for the nonphysical nature of consciousness. Hence when someone claims to have experienced mystical states of consciousness, unless we have reason to think him a charlatan, he ought to be taken seriously.

I respectively disagree on a few of those accounts, at least, the ones I know well enough. There is no evidence to claim non-physicality for consciousness. Not from metaphysics (metaphysics does not "live" outside physics, that's why it's meta), not from quantum physics (at the core no claim is made, only a collection of conflicting interpretations by theorists), Sheldrake can not be taken too serious (although I do appreciate his work) and not from paranormal activity which mostly amounts to anecdotal evidence or hard to independently verify claims (which does not mean it might not tell us something about things we do not understand yet - but obviously we still do not).

By adding many rather weak lines of evidences together, one does not create strong evidence. It's like a long chain consisting of weak links - it doesn't get any stronger no matter how many are added! And it's debatable if a report of a mystical state has to be taken more than it is: a report of a state. That would be the best default approach.

As for my own ""mystical" experiences, there have been no shortage of them but they actually more weaken the evidence of objectivity than strengthen it. It shows how immensely complex, resourceful and often deceiving the mind can be. It shows as well how immensely complex, unfathomable, resourceful and often deceiving the universe is and how it connects to mind. When that is understood fully and experienced completely, the notion of "mystical experience" becomes laughable. Good luck!

[PS I do agree that entheogens combined with proper guidance and seriousness above all can be a great starting point]

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:But solipsism itself is the ultimate philosophy, I still have had no ability to come up with a reason why I am not the only perspective in existence. All logic dissipates if I were, so logical reasons can't work to show otherwise. Now I am not saying it is the ultimate philosophy because it is undeniable, like many other philosophies are, but because once understood properly it sums up all of existence and my life to one thing: An endless dream I have no control over and know nothing about its origin. Sounds pretty right to me....

It seems you are missing the fact that you still act like you deal with other independent people. Have you ever tried to act as if they were unreal figments. Have you ever thought it wouldn't have consequences? Then as you said, you're not in control over the dream. So technically it's not yours either. If you were married and someone else told your wife what to do and when, spend almost all the time with her and totally controlled her life then it's not your wife anymore. You're free to dream she still is though. When you think something is yours, some level of claim, some level of control is assumed. Otherwise it's just wishful thinking, not any philosophical stand.

Diebert van Rhijn quotes: There is no evidence to claim non-physicality for consciousness.

This is not true. The evidence is purely, and totally in the reality of the emanation of thought itself. Thought is issued from its invisible parent consciousness. And thought does not have a body nor platform of reality UNTIL it arrives in the visible process of interpreted physical human awareness.

Should this not be correct, then it should be easy for one to show the housing of consciousness in the physical.


Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com

jufa wrote: the housing of consciousness

the brain ?
the universe ?

the GF?

Kunga wrote:

jufa wrote: the housing of consciousness

the brain ?
the universe ?

Should this be as you say, why the questions marks.

Where is the evidence? Backup what you say! Or give directions to justify you know this from direct experience beyond the line of identification in your human mind.


Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com

Ixtab wrote: Of course, the strongest evidence is to have a mystical experience oneself. This can be achieved through years of spiritual discipline and meditation. For the convinced atheist, however, who would not submit to such discipline, I would recommend as a starting point the ingestion of 200-400 micrograms of lycergic acid, in conjunction with meditation and the proper spiritual guidance.

Great! LSD got a hold of me.

Diebert van Rhijn

I'm not under that belief don't worry, I very much believe in the existence of your consciousness. Just pointing out there is no way to evidence anything outside of our single conscious experience, therefore my belief is assumed.

but.. reality is an illusion of the senses, there is no control over what we experience or our thoughts, and no self, only the feelings, which make up all of what we call "real", once you realize this, the need for a cause of our interconnected experiences becomes obvious. Some call this cause the "tao" because it is unknown. But the need for a cause is quiet clear when you have truly accepted this divine matrix. The same thing manifesting my experience of writing this, is the same thing manifesting your experience of reading it. That's oneness.

jufa wrote:

Kunga wrote:

jufa wrote: the housing of consciousness

the brain ?
the universe ?

Should this be as you say, why the questions marks.

Where is the evidence? Backup what you say! Or give directions to justify you know this from direct experience beyond the line of identification in your human mind.


Never give power to anything a person believes is their source of strength - jufa
http://theillusionofgod.yuku.com

Funny you ask that question without a question mark :)


The evidence is plain & simple. There is this consciousness....the brain is aware of this consciousness, so consciousness resides within the brain. The Universe contains everything, consciousness is in the Universe because the Universe is the home of everything. Although consciousness is said to reside no where...it is everywhere. The brain is aware/conscious. Consciousness houses itself inside the brain, as we have ear consciousness, taste consciousness, smell consciousness, feeling consciousness.

Kunga wrote:

The evidence is plain & simple. There is this consciousness....the brain is aware of this consciousness, so consciousness resides within the brain. The Universe contains everything, consciousness is in the Universe because the Universe is the home of everything. Although consciousness is said to reside no where...it is everywhere. The brain is aware/conscious. Consciousness houses itself inside the brain, as we have ear consciousness, taste consciousness, smell consciousness, feeling consciousness.

Am I the only enlightened philosopher on earth? In case you guys didn't know this is a forum about enlightenment.. and as the enlightened ones have known for thousands of years, quoting buddha, "reality is but an illusion".

Sensory experience makes up what you call the universe. There is no corresponding physical universe that would exist outside of consciousness. This is an enlightened truth, you cannot understand it unless you have seen it.

SeekerOfWisdom wrote:Sensory experience makes up what you call the universe. There is no corresponding physical universe that would exist outside of consciousness

Yes, without consciousness we could not perceive through our senses, feel the sun, see the sun,hear the thunder, feel the rain....if there were no beings in the Universe to perceive (be aware) of things ...there would still be consciousness. Consciousness aware of itself. So in reality this is an illusion...as all is consciousness and nothing else. The physical and spiritual are one and the same. Everything is equal.

So what is gravity ? Without gravity everything would fall apart & merge as one. This has been on my mind a lot lately...what life would be like without gravity...seeing the phenomenal world & trying to comprehend it's profound diversity...and trying to see this diversity as one entity.

Forget specific questions like that. Gravity is only a product of experience. Venture into the nature of experience and consciousness rather than specifics like gravity.

Understanding oneness is in understanding that we are all experiencing the manifestations of the same higher awareness or consciousness. We exist only as those manifestations. Same thing writing this as is reading it. Everything is a miracle.

And more specifically I was saying without consciousness there would be no sun. That the sun exists only in the feelings. The feelings make up reality, there is nothing else. No corresponding physical reality, just an incredible illusion of the senses.