tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post1342129488719989769..comments2024-03-27T22:46:04.400-07:00Comments on The Whirlpool of Life: The Illusion of SelfScott D. Sampsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13536199701500758905noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-20650260356916357842012-07-29T03:54:30.795-07:002012-07-29T03:54:30.795-07:00@ esset: As far as I know, no one has ever detecte...@ esset: As far as I know, no one has ever detected a soul or soul-substance. Neurobiology does a pretty good job of describing how self-consciousness arises out of the body's 5 senses interacting with the environment. There's a lot about this on the internet. It should be easy to google up. Best regards..hapkido1996https://www.blogger.com/profile/17549152340702564718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-37076519156418523642012-07-29T03:51:35.823-07:002012-07-29T03:51:35.823-07:00Very interesting read! When I try to discuss these...Very interesting read! When I try to discuss these very same ideas with well-educated friends, I invariably get heated, threatened resistence. The attraction of the notion of an individual, unique self - particularly in the West - is so strong that even most Buddhists reject it. At least the Western ones that I know do. And as far as I know, the Buddhist concept of anatta (the lack of inherent selfness in phenomena) is the first expression of this insight. Or at least one of the first.hapkido1996https://www.blogger.com/profile/17549152340702564718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-69083211334867684912012-06-16T13:13:38.700-07:002012-06-16T13:13:38.700-07:00This is funny and serious at the same time.<a href="http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/06/sense-of-self-is-illusion.html" rel="nofollow">This is funny and serious at the same time.</a>Evi L. Bloggerladyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00371362907839227149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-70706394894514028102012-05-07T19:15:08.692-07:002012-05-07T19:15:08.692-07:00I really enjoyed this article. My take on what he ...I really enjoyed this article. My take on what he refers to as "separate" self is as follows.<br /><br />The author is referring to the self that is the inner monologue, the "I" that we have developed and maintained over the years. To simply omit the words "you", "your" etc would be a tad difficult to say the least!<br /><br />I think the basis for the argument would be to use those words existentially, rather than to identify with them personally. The illusion of self is pretty strong, but once you see past it in the expanse of infinite silence of the universe, it is truly amazing. <br /><br />:DAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-58470093332836675302012-02-24T00:38:36.837-08:002012-02-24T00:38:36.837-08:00Esset, a fantastic book on the subject is Consciou...Esset, a fantastic book on the subject is Consciousness Explained, by Daniel Dennet.Corinnahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03924780589087841023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-24867376257192329742011-12-05T05:21:58.202-08:002011-12-05T05:21:58.202-08:00But what about the human soul ? If you do not have...But what about the human soul ? If you do not have a soul how would you explain self-counsciousness ?religionskritikerenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11344497490274541820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-597557267637426992010-04-14T17:48:53.249-07:002010-04-14T17:48:53.249-07:00I agree Andrea. As noted above in my response to ...I agree Andrea. As noted above in my response to Mike, I am not advocating that we discard our sense of self (which would never happen anyway). Rather we need to see ourselves both as parts and wholes, as individuals selves and collective selves. To get there, we must disolve the boundary (at least temporarily) between self and other, and realize that we are not separate and isolated from the rest of the world, but fully embedded within it on both micro and macro scales. Thanks for your comment.Scott D. Sampsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13536199701500758905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-2913079271615481862010-04-14T07:18:00.415-07:002010-04-14T07:18:00.415-07:00Interestingly, you mentioned in the post that bact...Interestingly, you mentioned in the post that bacteria are excluded from the Central Nervous System. Although I completely agree in considering the human body as an echosystem lacking a real boundary from the "external" world, I think the "self" concept cannot dissolve completely, being it one of the most important elements of that symbolic system called "human mind". The "self", here considered a symbol useful in the elaboration of complex social interactions, probably evolved very early in human evolution (if not before hominid origin), becaming a deeply nested element of human mind. The dissolution of the "self" probably would imply the dissolution of the complex pattern of neural elaborations that produces every human beings. <br />So, I agree in thinking that "the dissolution of our separate selves can help us see the world in new, more accurate, and even sustainable ways", but, at the same time, how deep and complete the dissolution of "self" could be, if the mind doing that dissolution was build by the "self concept" itself (horrible play of words)?Andrea Cauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10855060597677361866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-68109471198828976982010-04-14T01:43:43.657-07:002010-04-14T01:43:43.657-07:00You write Mr. Scott!
Everyday do we ask what mean...You write Mr. Scott!<br /><br />Everyday do we ask what mean evolution? Is it arrested?...Never!<br />It is, probably, a continuos synergy with nonhuman world?<br />Afterword we are part of Earth's metabolism.<br /><br />ThanksPaolo Barrasso Associationhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13997581591912499884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-89244345031950371642010-04-13T20:56:39.719-07:002010-04-13T20:56:39.719-07:00Thanks for the comments Mike. First, to my knowle...Thanks for the comments Mike. First, to my knowledge (keeping in mind that I'm a vertebrate paleontologist), mitochondria are thought to have first evolved within prokaryotes rather than eukaryotes (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrion), so the assertion of bacterial origins seems accurate.<br /><br />Second, I agree wholeheartedly that the notion of a separate self is far too ingrained to be discarded entirely. Nor would I consider this a step forward. The key is to see ourselves as wholes and parts, to get a sense that we are both emergent selves and also amalgams of other life forms that embed us fully into the nonhuman world.Scott D. Sampsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13536199701500758905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8794312182471569364.post-59345026478790396652010-04-13T13:45:42.217-07:002010-04-13T13:45:42.217-07:00Excellent points.
"Hundreds of millions of y...Excellent points.<br /><br />"Hundreds of millions of years ago, mitochondria evolved from certain types of bacteria that were engulfed by other bacterial forms."<br /><br />Weren't they engulfed by eukaryotic cells? Or do we know whether cellular nuclei evolved before or after mitochondria? (In either case, calling the basal neomurans that the main portion of eukaryotic cells evolved from "bacterial" might be contentious, no?)<br /><br />"I think that the dissolution of our separate selves can help us see the world in new, more accurate, and even sustainable ways."<br /><br />The concept of self probably too ingrained in our wiring (and our language) to ignore completely. (Even this essay uses words like "you" and "your" and "being".) But it can be productive to try and see past it.Mike Keeseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00147156174467903264noreply@blogger.com