Our daily experiences are mere illusions

[bahman]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time. Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

[Harbal]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time.

No you don't. You merely spout a load of rubbish and then come to an unjustified conclusion.

[bahman]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time.

No you don't. You merely spout a load of rubbish and then come to an unjustified conclusion.

You are welcome to post your justification for what I argue is rubbish in another thread.

[Harbal]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time.

No you don't. You merely spout a load of rubbish and then come to an unjustified conclusion.

You are welcome to post your justification for what I argue is rubbish in another thread.

Yes, I know I am welcome to do that, it's a forum.

[bahman]

No you don't. You merely spout a load of rubbish and then come to an unjustified conclusion.

You are welcome to post your justification for what I argue is rubbish in another thread.

Yes, I know I am welcome to do that, it's a forum.

Have you ever tried deep meditation or LSD? You could at least read people's reports on these techniques to see the reality differently. How could you explain those experiences, like flashbacks, unity with the universe, and the like!?

[Harbal]

You are welcome to post your justification for what I argue is rubbish in another thread.

Yes, I know I am welcome to do that, it's a forum.

Have you ever tried deep meditation or LSD?

No.

You could at least read people's reports on these techniques to see the reality differently.

I've heard accounts of LSD "trips". Who knows if they are really getting a glimpse of an alternative, or even deeper, reality, or if their brains have just gone temporarily off the rails?

How could you explain those experiences, like flashbacks, unity with the universe, and the like!?

I can't explain the workings of the brain; I haven't had the training.

[bahman]

Yes, I know I am welcome to do that, it's a forum.

Have you ever tried deep meditation or LSD?

No.

Why don't you give it a try? Meditation is free!

You could at least read people's reports on these techniques to see the reality differently.

I've heard accounts of LSD "trips". Who knows if they are really getting a glimpse of an alternative, or even deeper, reality, or if their brains have just gone temporarily off the rails?

If you don't know, it is better to be open to explanations.

How could you explain those experiences, like flashbacks, unity with the universe, and the like!?

I can't explain the workings of the brain; I haven't had the training.

Cool that you admit that.

[Harbal]

Have you ever tried deep meditation or LSD?

No.

Why don't you give it a try? Meditation is free!

I wouldn't know where to get LSD, even if I wanted to try it, and I can't sit still long enough to meditate; I'm a proper little fidget.

I've heard accounts of LSD "trips". Who knows if they are really getting a glimpse of an alternative, or even deeper, reality, or if their brains have just gone temporarily off the rails?

If you don't know, it is better to be open to explanations.

I suppose I am open minded, really, but I've also got a very sceptical nature, so I sometimes find myself pulled in two directions.

I can't explain the workings of the brain; I haven't had the training.

Cool that you admit that.

Admitting I don't know stuff has become a bit of a habit with me; I suppose it's because I've had to do it so often.

[bahman]

No.

Why don't you give it a try? Meditation is free!

I wouldn't know where to get LSD, even if I wanted to try it, and I can't sit still long enough to meditate; I'm a proper little fidget.

Then please read about people's experiences. You can google it yourself. It is free too!

I've heard accounts of LSD "trips". Who knows if they are really getting a glimpse of an alternative, or even deeper, reality, or if their brains have just gone temporarily off the rails?

If you don't know, it is better to be open to explanations.

I suppose I am open minded, really, but I've also got a very sceptical nature, so I sometimes find myself pulled in two directions.

If you are open-minded and skeptical then you should be open that our daily experiences might be mere illusions as well.

I can't explain the workings of the brain; I haven't had the training.

Cool that you admit that.

Admitting I don't know stuff has become a bit of a habit with me; I suppose it's because I've had to do it so often.

I don't know many things either but I know a lot! Here, in this forum, I share what I know!

[Harbal]

Why don't you give it a try? Meditation is free!

I wouldn't know where to get LSD, even if I wanted to try it, and I can't sit still long enough to meditate; I'm a proper little fidget.

Then please read about people's experiences. You can google it yourself. It is free too!

I have read stuff, and seen it on Youtube, but I just don't trust these people; I can't help it. They could be lying, or they could be nuts, I have no way of knowing, so I don't think it worth wasting time on.

If you are open-minded and skeptical then you should be open that our daily experiences might be mere illusions as well.

Yes, they might be illusions, but they are useful illusions; they enable us to function. I'm sure seeing tangerine trees and marmalade skies is a wonderfully novel experience, but what can you do with it?

[bahman]

I wouldn't know where to get LSD, even if I wanted to try it, and I can't sit still long enough to meditate; I'm a proper little fidget.

Then please read about people's experiences. You can google it yourself. It is free too!

I have read stuff, and seen it on Youtube, but I just don't trust these people; I can't help it. They could be lying, or they could be nuts, I have no way of knowing, so I don't think it worth wasting time on.

Not all people are liars. There is a correlation between reported experiences therefore they are real!

If you are open-minded and skeptical then you should be open that our daily experiences might be mere illusions as well.

Yes, they might be illusions, but they are useful illusions; they enable us to function. I'm sure seeing tangerine trees and marmalade skies is a wonderfully novel experience, but what can you do with it?

Glad to see that you admit that our daily experiences might be illusions. That is the first step to knowing the truth, doubt! We might not function as we are used to when we meditate for example but we at least know the reality might be different than what we are used to. What is the use of it? To know the memories buried inside you for example. Most of our psychological problems are due to our past experiences that we are not aware of them. To open the door, the third eye, toward existence, possibilities about things you have never experienced such as meaning!

[Veritas Aequitas]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time. Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

The word mind is a very loose term
You have not define what is mind.
You need give a precise meaning of what is 'mind.'
What are the features of your term 'mind'.
Is your mind an entity with agency?

What is typically understood at present as 'mind' is this;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind
Mind is an emergent out of the human brain and body, if no humans, there is no mind.

The other meaning of mind is that of body-mind dualism of Descartes, where the mind is equated with an independent soul that survives after death. Hume had refuted this, i.e. there is no I-AM, the I-Think is merely a bundle of human activities.

I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time.

It is argued that time and space-time are illusions if claimed to be absolutely real.

There are loads of video that support the above, refer to the following results:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... n+illusion
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... e+illusion

Since your mind is grounded in space and time,
and that space and time are illusions,
then, your 'mind' is also illusory.

Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

Our daily experience in space and time are not illusions if taken relatively to its specific framework and system [FS].
For example, based on the common sense FS, my monitor and my typing the keyboard is not illusory.

Common sense reality is an illusion only if one claim common sense represent reality absolutely regardless of whatever the conditioned-FS.
The monitor I see is not an illusion within the common sense FS, but if viewed from an atomic FS, the monitor is an illusion because what the 'common-sense-monitor' really is, is merely a cluster of atoms.

If based on the QM perspective, the monitor is not there when I am not looking at it.

Your thinking above is too shallow and narrow as driven by an evolutionary default and existential crisis resulting in you being dogmatic and fundamentalistic with your rigid views as in the OP.

[bahman]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time. Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

The word mind is a very loose term
You have not define what is mind.
You need give a precise meaning of what is 'mind.'
What are the features of your term 'mind'.
Is your mind an entity with agency?

A mind is a changeless substance with the ability to experience, decide, and cause.

What is typically understood at present as 'mind' is this;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind
Mind is an emergent out of the human brain and body, if no humans, there is no mind.

The other meaning of mind is that of body-mind dualism of Descartes, where the mind is equated with an independent soul that survives after death. Hume had refuted this, i.e. there is no I-AM, the I-Think is merely a bundle of human activities.

No, the mind is a changeless substance so it cannot be emergent.

I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time.

It is argued that time and space-time are illusions if claimed to be absolutely real.

There are loads of video that support the above, refer to the following results:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... n+illusion
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... e+illusion

Since your mind is grounded in space and time,
and that space and time are illusions,
then, your 'mind' is also illusory.

You are mixing psychological space-time with physical space-time.

Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

Our daily experience in space and time are not illusions if taken relatively to its specific framework and system [FS].
For example, based on the common sense FS, my monitor and my typing the keyboard is not illusory.

Common sense reality is an illusion only if one claim common sense represent reality absolutely regardless of whatever the conditioned-FS.
The monitor I see is not an illusion within the common sense FS, but if viewed from an atomic FS, the monitor is an illusion because what the 'common-sense-monitor' really is, is merely a cluster of atoms.

If based on the QM perspective, the monitor is not there when I am not looking at it.

Your thinking above is too shallow and narrow as driven by an evolutionary default and existential crisis resulting in you being dogmatic and fundamentalistic with your rigid views as in the OP.

Yes, so you are confirming my point. An atom is mainly empty space. It is not rigid. It does not have any color...

[Veritas Aequitas]

Here I argue that the mind is omnipresent in space-time. Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

The word mind is a very loose term
You have not define what is mind.
You need give a precise meaning of what is 'mind.'
What are the features of your term 'mind'.
Is your mind an entity with agency?

A mind is a changeless substance with the ability to experience, decide, and cause.

What is typically understood at present as 'mind' is this;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind
Mind is an emergent out of the human brain and body, if no humans, there is no mind.

The other meaning of mind is that of body-mind dualism of Descartes, where the mind is equated with an independent soul that survives after death. Hume had refuted this, i.e. there is no I-AM, the I-Think is merely a bundle of human activities.

No, the mind is a changeless substance so it cannot be emergent.

Here are the critiques to your claim;
"A mind is a changeless substance with the ability to experience, decide, and cause."
from AI [wR];

The statement presents a philosophical view of the mind that is challenging to reconcile with contemporary scientific understanding.

Tenability of the Statement
The claim that the mind is a "changeless substance" is highly problematic. Here's why:

Scientific Evidence of Brain Plasticity: Modern neuroscience provides overwhelming evidence that the brain, the physical organ underlying mental processes, is highly malleable. Experiences, learning, and even injuries can physically alter brain structure and function. This contradicts the idea of a changeless mind.
Consciousness as a Process: While the nature of consciousness remains a subject of intense debate, it is generally understood as a process rather than a static substance. This process is influenced by a myriad of factors, including sensory input, memories, emotions, and bodily states.
Decision-Making as a Dynamic Process: Research in psychology and neuroscience demonstrates that decision-making is a complex interplay of cognitive, emotional, and environmental factors. It is a dynamic process influenced by changing circumstances and internal states.

Criticisms of the Statement
Substance Dualism: The statement implies a form of substance dualism, positing the mind as a distinct entity separate from the physical body. This view has been heavily criticized by philosophers and scientists alike due to its difficulty in explaining how a non-physical substance could interact with a physical one.
Oversimplification of Mental Processes: The statement oversimplifies the complexity of mental processes. It reduces experiences, decisions, and causation to the abilities of a static substance, ignoring the intricate neural and cognitive mechanisms involved.
Lack of Empirical Support: There is no empirical evidence to support the idea of a changeless mental substance. On the contrary, evidence from psychology, neuroscience, and other fields points to the dynamic and complex nature of the mind.

In conclusion, the statement "A mind is a changeless substance with the ability to experience, decide, and cause" is not tenable in light of current scientific understanding.
It presents an overly simplistic and outdated view of the mind.
A more accurate and nuanced understanding requires considering the mind as a complex, dynamic process grounded in the brain and influenced by a multitude of factors.

Our daily experiences are however local in space and time. Therefore they are mere illusions.

Yes, so you are confirming my point. An atom is mainly empty space. It is not rigid. It does not have any color...
[/quote]
You missed my point.
My point is, you are wrong in asserting "our daily experiences are mere illusions because they are in space and time.
Rather,
'our daily experiences in space and time are as real as they are within the condition of space and time' and are capable of being verified and justified by science.

Our daily experiences in space and time are only illusions if we insist they exists absolutely independent of the mind, i.e. as things-in-themselves.