Rupert Spira disagrees with Tdarcos.

The Future of Radio begins..... now. <a href="http://donrogersshow.blogspot.com">http://donrogersshow.blogspot.com/</a>
Post Reply
User avatar
pinback
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
Contact:

Rupert Spira disagrees with Tdarcos.

Post by pinback » Sun Mar 05, 2017 8:25 am

Regarding Tdarcos' (and others') insistence that "he" is somewhere behind his eyes.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5wfFVaMA_w[/youtube]
Above all else... We shall go on... And continue!

User avatar
RealNC
Posts: 1460
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:32 am

Post by RealNC » Sun Mar 05, 2017 9:40 am

Is this a whackjob? Because I don't want to waste 8min of my life listening to a whackjob.

User avatar
pinback
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
Contact:

Post by pinback » Sun Mar 05, 2017 11:33 am

I'd suggest not clicking on it until you're ready.
Above all else... We shall go on... And continue!

User avatar
AArdvark
Posts: 8124
Joined: Tue May 14, 2002 6:12 pm
Location: Rochester, NY

Post by AArdvark » Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:30 pm

So that's never for me. I got enough whack-jobs floating around without watching them spout on Youtube.




THE
YOU'RE SOAKING IN IT
AARDVARK

User avatar
pinback
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
Contact:

Post by pinback » Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:34 pm

Lotta judgment in this thread, folks. I wonder what it is you're afraid of.
Above all else... We shall go on... And continue!

User avatar
Flack
Posts: 6150
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:02 pm
Location: Oklahoma
Contact:

Post by Flack » Sun Mar 05, 2017 1:18 pm

I'm afraid of an 8 minute whackjob, without the proper lubrication.
"Jack Flack always escapes." -Davey Osborne

User avatar
pinback
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
Contact:

Post by pinback » Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:09 pm

Well, you're all just being horrible. But that's okay. Forgiveness is the essence of who I am.
Above all else... We shall go on... And continue!

User avatar
Tdarcos
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 9:25 am
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Contact:

Post by Tdarcos » Mon Mar 06, 2017 5:29 pm

He's a whackjob. There are so many things wrong with what Rupert Spira said I don't know where to begin. This is mostly new age mysticism.

First, I'll talk about the teenager asked what they're watching example. if you asked some teenager looking at a TV set "what are you looking at?" or "what are you watching?" I seriously believe they are going to respond the same way, by identifying the program. And if they turn off the TV and were asked either question, would answer "nothing." This guy goes out on a limb and proceeds to say that some (unidentified) percentage if asked "what are you looking at" when the TV is turned off are a bit smarter and that they'd say "the screen." I seriously doubt even 1 in 100,000 would answer the question literally.

I have stated that where I am (in my head) is "approximately" the back of my eyes because I cannot provide a better, more precise location. He proceeds to throw this out with an example of someone named Mark in Garrison dreaming they are someone else, named John, looking at the streets of New York, closing his eyes, and no longer seeing, presuming he is there in New York and his consciousness is behind his eyes, standing in New York, while he's actually in Garrison. Only thing is, Spira does not realize he's referring to a construct invented by his brain, and not to actual conditions.

You could see or experience anything your mind can conjure up in a dream and confusing the experience of a dream with reality is not a valid comparison.

In short, he gives no reason to argue otherwise and no evidence or even conjecture.

I can argue a better counterargument to my own opinion right now and he didn't even try. It is possible because the brain has no sensory cells - the brain cannot feel pain, for example - the actual location of the consciousness might be someplace else and it is the connection point to the senses that we perceive as the location of the consciousness rather than the actual location, which might be in the frontal lobes, or down in the back.

A real-life example would be a cell phone that has contact with one tower but does not have GPS. All the phone "knows" is that it is a certain distance away, plus or minus one mile, and that it sees the tower as 4 miles away. This means you make a circle 4 miles around a tower and make the circle 1 mile thick. Math tells us the area of the diameter of a circle is PI*R**2 (Pi x Radius raised to the second power.) For a 4 mile circle one mile wide, that's an area of 52 square miles that the phone can be located in.

I think what he is trying to say without explicitly saying it, is that not all of our consciousness is contained within our body. Which he provides no evidence or even conjecture for.
"For I have loved you dearly, more dearly than the spoken word can tell."
- Roger Whittaker, The Last Farewell

User avatar
pinback
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
Contact:

Post by pinback » Mon Mar 06, 2017 5:31 pm

I knew that would go well. I consider the matter closed.
Above all else... We shall go on... And continue!

User avatar
pinback
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 3:00 pm
Contact:

Post by pinback » Mon Mar 06, 2017 5:44 pm

I should point out one thing, though:
Tdarcos wrote:First, I'll talk about the teenager asked what they're watching example. if you asked some teenager looking at a TV set "what are you looking at?" or "what are you watching?" I seriously believe they are going to respond the same way, by identifying the program. And if they turn off the TV and were asked either question, would answer "nothing." This guy goes out on a limb and proceeds to say that some (unidentified) percentage if asked "what are you looking at" when the TV is turned off are a bit smarter and that they'd say "the screen." I seriously doubt even 1 in 100,000 would answer the question literally.

I have stated that where I am (in my head) is "approximately" the back of my eyes because I cannot provide a better, more precise location. He proceeds to throw this out with an example of someone named Mark in Garrison dreaming they are someone else, named John, looking at the streets of New York, closing his eyes, and no longer seeing, presuming he is there in New York and his consciousness is behind his eyes, standing in New York, while he's actually in Garrison. Only thing is, Spira does not realize he's referring to a construct invented by his brain, and not to actual conditions.

You could see or experience anything your mind can conjure up in a dream and confusing the experience of a dream with reality is not a valid comparison.
Both of these things were metaphors, analogies to help convey the message he was intending to convey. The fact that you took them literally and responded as such just proves that you are a goddamn TREASURE to this BBS, and we are all happy you are here.
Above all else... We shall go on... And continue!

Post Reply