Cogito, ergo sum, said Descartes. I think, therefore I am. I=ego. If you do the thinking, why don't you know what you will think 30 seconds from now? If "I" think, why do "I" try to control "my" thoughts?Descartes had it backward. I am, therefore I think. Over centuries, this has proved hard for people to "get" but once "gotten" it becomes rather like riding a bicycle. A natural place of rest, a balance, is discovered.
Am-ness is the source of your being. Pure subject; no objects.
Nothing objective for science to find. Because consciousness proves eternally elusive as an object, some insist that the scientific paradigm is not flawed. It's just that consciousness does not exist.
Rather than focus on what objective neuroscience study can reveal, they insist that only by the non-existence of consciousness can the paradigm be saved for the study of mind/brain. Go figure.
No comments:
Post a Comment