Trying to formulate a conception of the soul from Bernado's perspective

[Jules]

I am currently writing a paper about Plato and I am considering Plato's conception of the soul in the light of Bernado's books.

Putting Plato to one side, a standard definition of soul is the spiritual and immortal part of the human.

In considering the nature of the soul, I think it is right to suggest that the soul is our unique mind's participation in God (Mind at Large). It is this participation that is unique and immortal. The human mind participates in the so-called physical world which is a reflection of the Mind of God.

Does this notion of a unique participation make sense? Is the concept of "soul" actually helpful in enabling us to understand the true nature of reality?

[RHC]

That works for me,  Bernardo would use the the word localization rather than participation but thats a quibble.  Participation is nice because it captures the co-creative aspect of humans in our corner of God. 

[Mark Tetzner]

Here is one more thing that might be a little bit contradictory.

So first we need a specific configuration of atoms to form an alter and for the alter to have self-awareness which a rock does not possess.

Now after death, that much needed configuration ceases to exist.

So lets say some unity-consciousness is now what we mesh into.

But why do some believe a separate sould might emerge?

[Scott Roberts]

On Sunday, February 25, 2018 at 8:18:57 AM UTC-10, Mark Tetzner wrote:

Here is one more thing that might be a little bit contradictory.

So first we need a specific configuration of atoms to form an alter and for the alter to have self-awareness which a rock does not possess.

No we don't. Atoms are pixels in the interface between physically embodied alters and MAL. There is no reason there can't be non-physical alters with a different (perhaps more transparent) interface with MAL.

 

Now after death, that much needed configuration ceases to exist.

So lets say some unity-consciousness is now what we mesh into.

But why do some believe a separate sould might emerge?

Because the soul was and is already in existence with its non-physical interface. It is just the physical interface that disappears.

 

[Dana Lomas]

"So first we need a specific configuration of atoms to form an alter ... " ~ MT

This is still conflating a concept with the apparent existence of an actual separate particle of matter. Again, there is no such particle except insofar as there is an alter that conceives of it. And that alter, as an individuated locus and expression of consciousness, is in no way dependent upon its association with the experience of a body form. Absent that experience, it becomes focused in other experiential constructs without the limitations of this consensus construct, and its interactive corporeal experience, in which case, interaction with other alters becomes purely psychical in nature, having no need of a fixated body-image interface. Analogously, what you are in essence is in no way dependent upon being translated into the appearance of these word-forms, in this cyber interface. But in the context of this forum construct, we are limited to that format of expression. However, if this forum and its format were to be shutdown permanently, and all these word-forms disappear, that does not mean the end of the ideas behind them or their source. Likewise, so it is with its body-form expression.

[Mark Tetzner]

Ok. I think I know what you mean. Under idealism atoms are phenomenons of nature.
And yet, if we were detached from our bodies and still be an alter, would this alter
not have to be tied to phenomenons also?

[Dana Lomas]

Yes, just saying that an individuated locus of consciousness doesn't have to have a fixated, exclusive body-form self-identification to have a phenomenal experience.

[Mark Tetzner]

Yes but without a body things get blown all over the place, I would think. No boundaries or physical interface ....its like a cloud of sand, soon it would cease to be. Methinks.

[Dana Lomas]

For sure, the shift from the intense focus and anchor of a fixated, body-form self-identity will be disorientating. But as the gradual dis-identification and loosening of the fixation is emphasized it can adapt to experience without it. Indeed, that may well be its evolutionary imperative. However, its attachment to that particular corporeal expression/experience is clearly extremely compelling, and no doubt serves its integral role in the metamorphosis of one's psyche -- through multiple cycles -- until it outgrows that crucible and stage.

On Monday, February 26, 2018 at 10:45:34 AM UTC-5, Mark Tetzner wrote:

Yes but without a body things get blown all over the place, I would think. No boundaries or physical interface ....its like a cloud of sand, soon it would cease to be. Methinks.

[Mark Tetzner]

Yes...just one objection. Evolution normally does not begin with the end in mind. It goes step by step....

[benjayk]

Well, "blown all over the place" is a physical concept isn't it? ;)

All this thought really tells you is that it's very hard to comprehend the inner structure of experiental realms beyond the ordinary physical one.
It does baffle my mind, but so do many aspects of physics.

[Mark Tetzner]

:) Indeed. All gud. We see when we get there right? In any event its a great scenario.
One that will get „The one“ of the schrooms......and me doing the happy dance.

Hope they have women there.