Marsha,

Mark says "touch your nose".  It is as simple as that.  Of course you
would say that you do not have a nose, but that the stream has them.
To that I say, "stream touch your nose".  I feel like I am posting to
a ghost of some kind.  Do you come out at night?  Are you kind of wavy
and spooky?  Are you one of those Dean Koontz characters?

Besides, when you say "if you watch the stream..", what do you mean by
that?  Is there a "you" that can actually watch the stream?  You seem
to contradict yourself in a single paragraph.  At least get your story
straight.  Is there something that can watch the stream or isn't
there?  Is it one big tangle of nothing at all?   And if it is nothing
at all, then why do you post about it?  Nothing comes from Nothing, as
they say.  Wisper me sweet nothings...

You are starting to worry me.  Perhaps you really are an algorithm,
constantly mutating like a computer virus in a mindless way.  Perhaps
there is no ghost in that machine.  WAKE UP!  Is there anybody in
there?  Perhaps it is impossible to do mindfulness if there is nothing
to do it.  That would explain a lot.  Let go of all that baloney, if
just for a moment.  You are free of patterns!  You are nothing more or
less than you.  You do not need any excuses.

The Devil made me do it.  Those gosh darn manipulative patterns.

Kind regards,
Mark

On 2/3/12, MarshaV <valkyr@att....> wrote:
>
> Mark,
>
> Marsha says what can be found, first-hand, is a continuous, stream of
> experiences, but not an independent, inherently-existing, substantial self
> that is calling the shots.  And if you watch the stream of experiences, you
> find that the stream is made up of discontinuous bits and pieces of patterns
> with associated feelings, perceptions, motivation and awareness.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Feb 2, 2012, at 5:31 PM, 118 <ununoctiums@gmai...> wrote:
>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> Personally I find it difficult to separate evolution from science,
>> since I was taught on the scientific presentation of evolution.  I
>> have no problem presenting an evolutionary description of reality, for
>> that is what "evolutionary theory" is.  Certainly there are many
>> scientific suggestions as to what consciousness is, and they keep
>> growing.  I am not so interested in describing consciousness, as
>> exploring the personal aspect of it.  It is easy to describe
>> consciousness in third person plural by explaining what consciousness
>> is as an object.  This may, or may not lead to a personal
>> enlightenment, if one personalizes it.
>>
>> To ask "why is this consciousness mine?" is another question.  Here we
>> must consider what it is that makes us, us, in a personal sense.  This
>> then gets away from the materialistic aspects of consciousness to more
>> of a Cartesian duality.  As Marsha has said, she cannot find the
>> "self" through any logical deconstructionism.  Yet, we know that it
>> exists because it makes one distinct from the other meat puppets out
>> there, who are lost in their own worlds.  Our personal world is only
>> ours, nobody else can experience it, why is that?  No matter how hard
>> we try we can never explain to another that it is actually "I" that is
>> speaking to them, not just another meat puppet.
>>
>> On 2/1/12, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau@comc...> wrote:
>>> Hi Mark and All,
>>>
>>> If you look at the etymology of the word "consciousness" you see two
>>> roots
>>> "Con" "scious"  "With" "awareness" or "knowledge".  Two principles are
>>> involved, evolution and science.  To make sense of that you have to posit
>>> an
>>> evolutionary description of reality "conscious" and "mechanical" or
>>> "mathematical" differences.  And the hunt is on!
>>
>> There is only a hunt if you define the parameters in order to create a
>> hunt.  If indeed we want to frame the debate in terms of mathematical
>> differences then we could hunt for such things.  I am game.
>>>
>>> Indefinable DQ definable SQ as a metaphysical base enables the
>>> recognition
>>> of the meaning of "consciousness".  Alright so you propose "evolution" as
>>> deciding the levels in existence, consciousness.  Mathematical order is
>>> inadequate since something is created from 0.  The definition of 1 has
>>> been
>>> changed in speech or consciousness.  I do not know how to make sense out
>>> of
>>> "consciousness" except through evolution which as yet does not have a
>>> metaphysical foundation! E(x) out of, voluntas, will.  Creation!
>>
>> Evolution does not decide the levels in existence.  It is not a God of
>> some sort, as I interpret it.  Evolution is a description of a
>> process.  It is not the process itself, but one way in which to speak
>> of it.  Mathematics is not created from 0.  It assumes a concept of 0
>> in order to grow as a presentation.  One is one, I am not sure of the
>> change.  Perhaps you are referring to unity or non-duality.  Of course
>> non-duality is not 1, because 1 can only exist as opposed to zero or
>> two or whatever number you want.  The number one cannot exist on its
>> own, it is meaningless.
>>
>> Evolution has a metaphysical foundation, it is called the Theory of
>> Evolution.  Is there another word you could use instead of "evolution"
>> so that I can see what you mean?
>>
>> If I try to extend the Theory of Evolution to consciousness it could
>> be as follows (off the top of my head):
>>
>>  "There is a selection process which considered focussed attention to
>> be necessary for survival.  Those individuals who were not able to
>> focus on a single intention did not survive, because they were too
>> scatter-brained (not referencing any one in the forum, by the way) to
>> go out and find food, or a partner.  Therefore consciouness began as a
>> survival adaptation.  It gave the individual a means with which to
>> continue to survive, through directed simplification of the
>> synchronicity of life.  Due to the enormous redundancy of the brain
>> (there are as many connections within the human brain as there are
>> stars), the brain was able to look back on itself (in a tortuous
>> manner which disguised that this is actually what we doing, i.e.
>> recycling water and pretending it is different water) and consider
>> one's own existence with relation to others.  This reflective
>> capability provided for such human traits as greed, pillage, and rape,
>> which is also a survival improvement as the chipmunks in the winter,
>> and the young stallion with his stolen harem will attest to.  In
>> addition, the ability of the human brain to create a conscious
>> projection of the future gave us the sense of terminality of our own
>> existence, and the need to survive all the more, this was very good
>> for evolution and in fact promoted the survival of the theory of
>> survival itself, in that those who feared death the most are all that
>> is left.  Death became the primary reason for survival whether it was
>> a losing battle or not, we are not reasonable enough to realize such
>> futility of reason, and besides, we are only instinct as evolution
>> will attest to, so evolution does not like reason.  Of course the
>> conception of a single existence and a void afterward was introduced
>> as an evolutionary incentive to try to stay alive as long as possible,
>> and thus evolution was able to increase is stranglehold on humanity.
>> Such projection capability which is inspired through a doggedly
>> complex memory, lead to questioning "what lies outside" of what we
>> know first hand (we want to know what is around that dark corner), and
>> into the regions of religion.  Religion was important for survival
>> because it created groups which would feel it necessary to survive
>> despite the antagonism against them, through the establishment of a
>> higher cause to which they must pray and obey.  The big boss of
>> consciousness was thus created for evolutionary purposes.  Once it had
>> had enough of that, evolution turned more to greed and avarice for its
>> followers.  This projection of meaning beyond oneself, provide a
>> species who was able to survive as a result of the ability to create
>> concepts which had no bearing on day to day reality.  The conscious
>> creations thus established, achieved a state of dominance over the
>> actual reality of the individual and promoted him/her to greater and
>> more complex groups which of course enhanced survival against being
>> eaten by a foreign invaders. And so, consciousness provided another
>> tool for evolution to bend our will.  Just to be secure of complete
>> domination, Evolution also caused individuals within a group to kill
>> the weakest ones available, those being the ones that did not believe
>> in evolution.  These individuals are of course dying off, for that is
>> the power of evolution.  So, it is clearly understood why the brains
>> material capacity to produce consciousness is a survival trait, and
>> that is its only purpose,everything else is trivial.  Those who think
>> otherwise will die off as an inferior species since they do not have
>> the guts to fight an destroy the evolutionists.  It is the belief in
>> evolution which comandeers the heartiest and the most willing to kill
>> (in the name of evolution).  Those meak non-evolutionists do not stand
>> a chance against the power of the Google Enterprise to subdue with
>> mediocraty in thought.  The other way in which we know that
>> consciousness promotes survival is that this is the only way to
>> explain why consciousness has surived.  If it had not survived it
>> would not have been an evolutionary bonus.  This is of course what has
>> happened to all those things that were not evolutionary improvements,
>> because they are not here.   It does not matter what they were, since
>> their not being here is proof enough.  That is one reason why
>> elephants do not live in NYC for example, even if we do read about
>> such possibilities in books; the bagels just do not add up.  We cannot
>> question evolutionary theory because it is self sufficient and does
>> not need any other proof except survival and the fact that elephant
>> bulls fight against each other to have a larger harem, and often
>> broken tusks.  Any notion that evolution is not the law of the land
>> will be taken care of through evolutionary means.  This is why the
>> three headed monkey God who whistles Dixie while taking a bath is no
>> longer around.  We simply have to be patient and "KILL! KILL! KILL!"
>> (did you say KILL?")  This is the evolutionary directive, only the
>> fittest survive, so you better survive to show that you are the
>> fittest.  If you can demonstrate this then you can survive to be the
>> fittest another day."
>>
>> And so forth.  The Theory of Evolution can explain consciousness as
>> well as any metaphysics.  It can explain why MoQ came about, quite
>> simply.  In fact, if it wasn't for Evolution, MoQ would not be here,
>> so we should be grateful, pray, and provide sacrifices to Evolution.
>> There are statues all over this country where we can leave donation
>> for the Power of All.  Just don't forget, NEVER question Evolution,
>> bad things happen.
>>>
>>> It seems to me it would be a lot easier if the levels in evolution after
>>> 1
>>> were definable in DQ/SQ terms since evolve "ex" "voluntas" out of will,
>>> suggests a mathematical order and creation.  Metaphysics involves 'Will'
>>> and
>>> 'order' in a dance beyond definable mathematics!  1 is rigid without
>>> evolution which redefines 1 in consciousness.
>>
>> They are defined in DQ/sq terms as far as I can tell.  This is the
>> dance which takes place outside of the mathematics lounge within which
>> those lizards are arguing about the meaning of the word "is".  We know
>> better, don't we?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/31/12 8:22 PM, "118" <ununoctiums@gmai...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maybe
>>>> you can contribute to what you think consciousness is.
>>>
>>>
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html