S
STT
Guest
There is no experiencer but mere experience.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
T
TheAmazingGrace
Guest
Cogito ergo sum.
Last edited:
E
End_Timer
Guest
“The singer, NOT the song”…But with Christianity it’s
the singer & the song
the singer & the song
S
STT
Guest
Think of a demon who can create experience and hold it coherently. There could be no experiencer.
T
TheAmazingGrace
Guest
Your terms could use some defining.
S
STT
Guest
What if thinking could be created.Cogito ergo sum.
S
STT
Guest
I am afraid I cannot help you. Did you get what I mean?
S
STT
Guest
What do you want me to define?Your terms could use some defining.
S
StAugustine
Guest
Ah! But a demon cannot create experience. They can only create phantasms in the imagination that ALREADY exist in memory.
This is why the healing of a man born blind by Christ was so huge- it is not replicable by the power of an angel, because mental images that can be brought about in the mind CANNOT be created, meaning a demon cannot simulate sight in one born blind because there is no memory of any object to draw on!
This is why the healing of a man born blind by Christ was so huge- it is not replicable by the power of an angel, because mental images that can be brought about in the mind CANNOT be created, meaning a demon cannot simulate sight in one born blind because there is no memory of any object to draw on!
Last edited:
S
STT
Guest
Could God create experience?Ah! But a demon cannot create experience. They can only create phantasms in the imagination that ALREADY exist in memory.
This is why the healing of a man born blind by Christ was so huge- it is not replicable by the power of an angel, because mental images that can be brought about in the mind CANNOT be created, meaning a demon cannot simulate sight in one born blind because there is no memory of any object to draw on!
S
StAugustine
Guest
Yes, but would he generate a false experience?
It is not consonant with truth to behave deceptively, therefore experience can only be within the domain of reality.
It is not consonant with truth to behave deceptively, therefore experience can only be within the domain of reality.
S
StAugustine
Guest
In other words- if there is no experiencer but only experience, then there is no subject to receive the truth of things.
But if this is the way things really are, you as a subject know it.
Therefore there are subjects capable of knowing reality.
Moreover, if there was only experience and no experiencer, there would be no way of distinguishing the real from the phantasmagoric. Yet we can make such distinctions, therefore we are the experiencers of reality.
But if this is the way things really are, you as a subject know it.
Therefore there are subjects capable of knowing reality.
Moreover, if there was only experience and no experiencer, there would be no way of distinguishing the real from the phantasmagoric. Yet we can make such distinctions, therefore we are the experiencers of reality.
S
STT
Guest
What do you mean with false?Yes, but would he generate a false experience?
God is sustaining everything including our experience. You could have a reality but what is point of having a reality when what is matter at the end is mere experience?It is not consonant with truth to behave deceptively, therefore experience can only be within the domain of reality.
S
StAugustine
Guest
Can experience shape the experiencer internally?
S
STT
Guest
I am wondering if you have an argument in favor of your claim.In other words- if there is no experiencer but only experience, then there is no subject to receive the truth of things.
Knowing is an experience.But if this is the way things really are, you as a subject know it.
This doesn’t follow considering my last comment.Therefore there are subjects capable of knowing reality.
How do you distinguish phantasmagoric from reality? Phantasmagoric could be coherent. Have you ever have lucid dream?Moreover, if there was only experience and no experiencer, there would be no way of distinguishing the real from the phantasmagoric. Yet we can make such distinctions, therefore we are the experiencers of reality.
S
StAugustine
Guest
OH, so you are asking, how do we determine whether our experience is real or illusory!
You are the argument in favor of my
Claim. You seek to conform your mind to reality by knowing the truth.
Where does the internal drive to know the truth originate, and what is it that retains the truth once it is found?
You are the argument in favor of my
Claim. You seek to conform your mind to reality by knowing the truth.
Where does the internal drive to know the truth originate, and what is it that retains the truth once it is found?
S
STT
Guest
Yes, but we experience that experience shapes the experiencer internally. How could we be sure that there is an experiencer when all which seems to be real is mere experience?Can experience shape the experiencer internally?
S
STT
Guest
We experience internal derive. I am questioning mind. So the same question applies to internal derive too.OH, so you are asking, how do we determine whether our experience is real or illusory!
You are the argument in favor of my
Claim. You seek to conform your mind to reality by knowing the truth.
Where does the internal drive to know the truth originate, and what is it that retains the truth once it is found?
S
SeriousQuestion
Guest
I don’t think you can.
S
STT
Guest
You know what experience and experiencer are?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.