• right now

  Adding your comment:
• 
  TeChNoWC
  October 5, 2006
  Edit | Reply
  yeah, you are. Unless you adhere to a form of spiritual transcendence, you are only your brain. All reality is in relation to the self, and percieved and recieved via the self, which is, the brain. The brain interprets, signals responses, allows responses to come to effect, assesses those responses, releases chemicals into the body to coincide with such activities and finally recieves and interprets those very chemicals that it issued into effect. Oh, and then it, after percieving such chemical reactions and effects, formulates thoughts and evaluates the effect in itself. Life is just the self communicating with the self, which is the brain.
• • 
    grant
    October 5, 2006
    Edit | Reply
    You are describing brain function. You might as well describe liver function.
• 
  TeChNoWC
  October 5, 2006
  Edit | Reply
  but if consciousness is regarded as the self, as well as bodily functions, however considered as more primarily the self, then this is in relation to the brain, and not the liver. The liver does not percieve. It is percieved by the brain, and, the liver, in an objective sense, affects the livelihood and reactions of the brain, however does not instigate such actions. One could regard the liver as the self also. But remove the liver, and replace it with a different liver, and one finds that the self is still eminent in the original body, regardless of the liver. Take out the brain however, and, arguably, the self moves with the brain. So the self is contained within, and is, the brain.
• 
  TeChNoWC
  October 5, 2006
  Edit | Reply
  I think I can pinpoint your response before it is even given. Do you mean to argue that the brain, even though displaying consciousness independent of the particular liver, still does not denote self as consciousness and essence does not denote self but rather entity? Or do you regard self as a non-existence, metaphysical, made up property? Then if so, you were wrong about the death thing all along. We do not die, because their is no 'self' to die. Only the organs and their functions are terminated.
• 
  grant
  October 9, 2006
  Edit | Reply
  If we are "we" as in these phenomenal bodies with their phenomenal brains, the "we" die.
• 
  TeChNoWC
  October 10, 2006
  Edit | Reply
  ok, so, you regard ourselves as a collective. This collective can merely be regarded as the self anyway, as multiple units become one singular unit under label (such as 'ant colony'). It is amusing to see you unable to explain your theorems up front due to your lack of adherence to belief. You simply wait for me to uncover what you do in fact believe, but hope to regard as automative observation and inherent truths without any sort of conscious deliberation or rationalisation. As such, my efforts will cost me years to unravel your thoughts, because you deny them.
• birdlover06
  October 14, 2006
  Edit | Reply

  What are you talking about?

  What does the brain and liver functions have to do with the subject of religon?
• • 
    grant
    October 14, 2006
    Edit | Reply
    Because we are no longer our brains than we are our livers. Our livers have a specific function as an organ that cleanses the blood. One of the functions of the brain organ is that it thinks. Because it thinks it also believes stuff. Religion is about believing stuff. Religion is based on a function of an organ. But we are not an organ. And we aren't a religion (a bi-product of one of the organs in our body's function). We may only "believe" we are. But "belief" is just something the brain might choose to do due to cultural conditioning (institutional rules of cultures handed down through time). It is not neccessary to believe anything. I find living more interesting and surprising this way (without predictability or prophecy which can only be self fulfilling).

Please register or login to comment! It's totally free