|
Nondualism (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Just think about how many things can be reduced to ones and zeroes. It doesn't get much more dichotomous than that... |
advaita is more like saying whether you have heads or you have tails, there is still only one coin. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
advaita is more like saying whether you have heads or you have tails, there is still only one coin. |
I knew you'd appear in this thread sooner or later.
What is 'the coin' when talking about 1s and 0s? |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
What is 'the coin' when talking about 1s and 0s? |
The entirety of the system. At least, that's how we deal with it in linguistics =/ |
|
|
| Omega_M |
I loved this logo for the non-duality conference.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
i knew if i opened this thread i'd get a bunch of worthless cum in my eye. why can't philosophers just wank in the privacy of their own delusion? |
This is not just about philosophers. It's about physicists, neurologists, anthropologists, psychologists trying to make sense of what are seeing through their research. And the right way to approach this is through conferences like the one we are seeing here; which are a perfect forum for exchange of ideas between scholars of eastern philosophy and western scientists. Profiles of speakers in this conference are rather impressive.
| quote: | Dualisms shape our worldview. They include Mind/Matter, Self/Other, Perception/Reality, Quantum/Classical, Wave/Particle, Spiritual/Material, Beginning/End, Male/Female, Living/Dead and Good/Evil.
Wisdom gained through meditation, yoga and mystical experiences suggest these dichotomies are illusory. Eastern mystics know a single underlying reality called advaita, Brahman, the Tao, or Nirvana, from which all existence arises through consciousness. Nonduality is the philosophical and spiritual understanding that dualisms obscure a deeper reality of non-separation and fundamental oneness.
On the other hand, science depends on empirical data leading to reductionism, materialism and apparent dichotomies. But discoveries in quantum physics, brain sciences, consciousness studies, biology, cosmology, psychology and other fields have revealed nonduality in science as well, suggesting mysticism and science share a common source. Applying nondual perspectives in science, and scientific perspectives in Eastern spiritual approaches are the twin goals of this, the first public conference on the Science of Nonduality. Join us for three days seeking fundamental oneness in quantum physics, philosophy, consciousness studies, cosmology, art, Buddhism, psychology and spiritual metaphysics |
| quote: | What is nonduality, anyway?
There are many shades of meaning to the word nonduality. As an introduction, we might say that nonduality is the philosophical, spiritual, and scientific understanding of non-separation and fundamental oneness. Our starting point is the statement “we are all one,” and this is meant not in some abstract sense but at the deepest level of existence. Duality, or separation between the observer and the observed, is an illusion that the Eastern mystics have long recognized and Western science has more recently come to understand through quantum mechanics.
Dualities are usually seen in terms of opposites: Mind/Matter, Self/Other, Conscious/Unconscious, Illusion/Reality, Quantum/Classical, Wave/Particle, Spiritual/Material, Beginning/End, Male/Female, Living/Dead and Good/Evil. Nonduality is the understanding that identification with common dualisms avoids recognition of a deeper reality.
So how can we better understand nonduality?
There are two aspects to this question, and at first glance they appear to be mutually exclusive, although they may be considered two representations of a single underlying reality.
The first aspect is our understanding of external reality, and for this we turn to science. The word science comes from the Latin scientia, which means knowledge. The beauty and usefulness of science is that it seeks to measure and describe reality without personal, religious, or cultural bias. For something to be considered scientifically proven, it has to pass exhaustive scrutiny, and even then is always subject to future revision. Inevitably human biases creep in, but the pursuit of science itself is intrinsically an evolving quest for truth. But then quantum mechanics turned much of this lauded objectivity on its head, as the role of the observer became inseparable from the observed quantum effect. It is as if consciousness itself plays a role in creating reality. Indeed, the two may be the same thing. As quantum pioneer Niels Bohr once put it: “A physicist is just an atom's way of looking at itself!”
The second aspect is our inner, personal experience of consciousness, our “awareness of awareness.” We have our senses to perceive the world, but “behind” all perception, memory, identification and thought is simply pure awareness itself. Eastern mystics have described this undifferentiated consciousness for thousands of years as being the ultimate state of bliss, or nirvana. Seekers have attempted to experience it for themselves through countless rituals and practices, although the state itself can be quite simply described. As Indian advaita teacher Nisargadatta Maharaj said: “The trinity: mind, self and spirit, when looked into, becomes unity.”
The central challenge to understanding nonduality may be that it exists beyond language, because once it has been named, by definition -- and paradoxically -- a duality has been created. Even the statement “all things are one” creates a distinction between “one” and “not-one”! Hardly any wonder that nonduality has been misunderstood, particularly in the West. |
I suggest you take that cum out of your eyes. It's probably your own doing. :gsmile: |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
I knew you'd appear in this thread sooner or later.
What is 'the coin' when talking about 1s and 0s? |
All out of ideas yourself? It's a metaphor.
Not going to spend a lot of time in this thread, but I just wanted to point out that philosophical dualism in the sciences has been obsolete for many decades now, and monism essentially proven experimentally.
As Nisagardatta Maharaj would say, there is no 'observer' and 'observed', there is only 'observing', and in that 'observing' both the 'observer' and 'observed' are latent, the epiphenomena of consciousness and identification. This is the basic premise of advaita, and the current conclusion of quantum physical experiments such as the double slit experiment, if you're interested in that.
There's no silly mysticism here, no religiosity, no morals. Just one simple, profound truth.
Also to clarify and distinguish advaita from solipsism, solipsism would be like saying 'everything is me', and advaita is like saying 'nothing is me' (neti neti as is said in sanskrit, ie 'neither this, nor that') |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
The entirety of the system. At least, that's how we deal with it in linguistics =/ |
that's a good way to answer him :p |
|
|
| Fledz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
I knew you'd appear in this thread sooner or later.
What is 'the coin' when talking about 1s and 0s? |
There is no coin, only metal. |
|
|
| Cro_Addict |
Ok some people need to lay off the acid.
look at this
1+3=4
HOLY !! Its Quad-Dualism. that is ed up.
Like I said...Put the drugs away! |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
monism essentially proven experimentally |
Hold on there for a second: How was it proven? And what kind of monism are we talking about here? This is relevant to my interests, but I find it hard to believe anything has been proven experimentally, much less monism :conf:
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
that's a good way to answer him :p |
It seems reading about structuralism paid off :D |
|
|
| nefardec |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Hold on there for a second: How was it proven? And what kind of monism are we talking about here? This is relevant to my interests, but I find it hard to believe anything has been proven experimentally, much less monism :conf:
|
'essentially'
read this
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9903047v1
| quote: |
This paper reports a “delayed choice quantum eraser ”experiment proposed by Scully and Druhl in 1982. The experimental
results demonstrated the possibility of simultaneously observing both particle-like and wave-like behavior of a quantum via
quantum entanglement. The which-path or both-path information of a quantum can be erased or marked by its entangled twin
even after the registration of the quantum. |
In layman's terms - this experiment allowed the observers to affect events in the future even after they should have been, for lack of a better term 'fated' to result in a certain way. The delayed choice experiments, variations on the original double slit experiment, show that there is a tangled relationship between the observer and the observed, that their boundaries dissolve, one might say 'there is only the observing'. It is impossible, on the quantum level, to observe something without affecting the observed. This is essentially 'monism', and by that I don't mean your philosophy textbook definition, but just literally that there is only one truth from which any semblance of dualism is merely a latent effect or epiphenomenon of perspective or scale.
Advaita adherents don't deny the experience of this semblance - they just recognize it for what it is, merely a semblance (maya), and not the truth itself (brahman).
Lira, you might be interested in a book by the physicist David Bohm called 'Wholeness and the Implicate Order'. He more or less invents a linguistic mode for describing things without the 'dualism' of subjectivity and objectivity, and then goes on explaining nondualistic physics in that mode - it's pretty interesting. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
'essentially'
read this
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9903047v1
In layman's terms - this experiment allowed the observers to affect events in the future even after they should have been, for lack of a better term 'fated' to result in a certain way. The delayed choice experiments, variations on the original double slit experiment, show that there is a tangled relationship between the observer and the observed, that their boundaries dissolve, one might say 'there is only the observing'. It is impossible, on the quantum level, to observe something without affecting the observed. This is essentially 'monism', and by that I don't mean your textbook definition, but just literally that there is only one truth from which any semblance of dualism is merely an effect of perspective or scale. |
This is something that I'm going to take to bed with me. Hmmm...
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
Lira, you might be interested in a book by the physicist David Bohm called 'Wholeness and the Implicate Order'. He more or less invents a linguistic mode for describing things without the 'dualism' of subjectivity and objectivity, and then goes on explaining nondualistic physics in that mode - it's pretty interesting. |
I'm going to look for it in the local library... I wouldn't be surprised to find out it's available :) |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
All out of ideas yourself? It's a metaphor. |
No, my post was a rhetorical question. If your metaphor was better you would be able to come up with an answer for the 1s and 0s. I'm not the one making assertions about non-dualism, so I'm not required to come up with the ideas.
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
As Nisagardatta Maharaj would say, there is no 'observer' and 'observed', there is only 'observing', and in that 'observing' both the 'observer' and 'observed' are latent, the epiphenomena of consciousness and identification. This is the basic premise of advaita, and the current conclusion of quantum physical experiments such as the double slit experiment, if you're interested in that. |
An observer is part of the act of observing, which is a completely different thing to there being 'no' observer. Observing would not exist without there being both an observer and the subject of his attention.
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
There's no silly mysticism here, no religiosity, no morals. Just one simple, profound truth. |
I agree on the first three counts. However, interesting as the concept may be, it's not 'truth'; it's a concept expressed in words and doesn't exist in the real world. Refuting this leads to the logic that reality doesn't exist the way humans perceive it, which may well be true but is essentially useless to us since we have no way of changing it.
Also, if monism exists, shouldn't non-monism also exist? Why does non-dualism reduce everything to two elements, anyway? The world is a wonderfully varied place.
I think what pkc was trying to say, in a very non-eloquent way, is that suppositions such as this have no practical use to us, besides intellectual stimulation (or, more crudely, masturbation). One may well suppose that the world consists of just one thing, but if we know that for sure, where does it lead us? How could our lives, our reality or our destinies be improved by this knowledge? |
|
|
|
|
