Hi Boagie,

I think consciousness is a condition for matter, as is it a condition for reason and thereby self-consciousness. The thing-in-itself has these two attributes. It is that which exists. Inside this thing-in-itself several things-in-themselves exist. By seperating and understanding the distictions and after that combining and seeing the whole can one understand what exactly takes place.

You could do that, but perhaps that is not needed. you should check out Immanuel Kant to be truthfull. He is the one pointing all this out in an unparalelled manner. Apart from that I am writing an article on the reseach institutions that humanity uses. It will be done probably next week. I am thinking of posting it on the forums or in a blog. That would most likely make the foundations insightfull. I have also posted a brief introduction on Kant on the forums. Perhaps that will help as well.Arjen

Does consciousness survive death? As the content of consciousness is the physical world, and at death the physical world survives us, is our consciousness then content or the container? Is our consciousness the organ, the organ function or is it content, if it is content, then there is at least relative immortality, as long as there is a physcial world there is consciousness.

The (your) 'physical world' is brought into existence within and by 'your' Perspective (you ARE Perspective). Perspective looks upon the 'homogenous chaos/undifferentiated potential' of Mind and discerns patterns thereby. When Perspective closes (what appears as death), so does the 'universe' that is brought into existence by your 'seeing'.
It is only by us, Perspective, that Consciousness can know Mind (quantum possibility wave field). That 'Consciousness' can know 'Self/Mind'.

nameless,

Excellent! It is in fact, impossiable to separate consciousness from its object, as that from which it arises. It is a very insightful piece though. Schopenhauer's statement still stands, "Subject and object stand or fall together",

Are you guys still seperating the thing-in-itself from all things-in-themselves?

The (your) 'physical world' is brought into existence within and by 'your' Perspective (you ARE Perspective).

Is there, then, existence without perspective? Or does the whole of the physical world only exist within ones own experience?

Can we say that there are two worlds, the world from my perspective and the world as it is apart from me?

There is no existence without Perspective. It is Perspective that discerns 'patterns' in the chaos of (the One) Mind.

There is no 'world' apart from you (Perspective). Your world (at any moment) exists in Mind. Different universes for different Perspectives (people). All possibilities, all aspects of Mind, are therefore available to Consciousness.

Allow me to make things even more difficult:

What is physical when a staggeringly large part of matter is...nothing..

The issue I have with the individual universe idea is the general commonality of experience. I understand that you and I can interpret reality in different ways, but typically these different interpretations are very minor details.

For example, we are both at a play and after the production one the playwright comes on stage to give his view on why he wrote the play. Afterwords, you and I discuss what the playwright had said, and you interpret the playwrights words as arrogant and I interpret them as sentimental.

Now, you and I both saw the same speech, for if we did not we could not coherently discuss what happened. Generally speaking, we had an extremely similar experience, the lighting, the sound, the decorations of the auditorium, the various people around us, the sequence of events, and a countless number of other things were so similar, that if you and I were to go back, and our memory didn't fail us, we would paint the exact same picture.

The only thing we would not agree on was the attitude of the playwright. This is the one thing that I must concede. Our common experience is upheld except for this minor detail.

I think it would be impossible for me not to agree that there are certain things that are left to interpretation, but generally, and I will even say most of the time, the physical world is experienced the exact same way.

If the majority of the human race experiences the world and the events contained with in it, how can one argue that the universe is only contained within the realm of ones own mind, and therefore that there are individual universes?

Arjen,
That would infer, that the concept of nothing is not only wrong but deseptive, nothing being in reality, another form of matter,

Just an added thought on there being no such thing as human action there is for man, but reaction. Think of the problem of, a subject alters the results of an experiment by his mere presence. The physical world as object, with its mere existence acts upon the living subject, thus, evoking the reactionary response we confuse with action.

Arjen,

:)What is the MATTER Arjen? Sorry I could not resist it!!

"Is mass really the same as thought in that sense?" Arjen quote

:)The funny thing about the production of thought is, it has a witness, that knows itself as something which has thoughts----------twilight zone!!

:)Perhaps in the sense of knowability matter might be said to belong to apparent reality, thought on the other hand might be boarderline and belong somewhat to ultimate reality.

Or are matter and thought linked through the fact that both are energy, condesed to different vibrations? That way there are several distinctions to be made:
-Distinctions by vibration (is it mass, thought or other)
-Distinctions by containment (is it contained by me or by something else)

Arjen,

I think in this we reach our limits of reason and philosophy, new insights which will fuel philosopy will come from neurology. But the generality that states that cause and effect, is not, the basis of how the world works.That a new understanding that the whole is a relational complexity, and that transformations from the simplist to the more complex are processes of mutual relational reactions, might be possiable to discern. This alone should restructure our thinking, at the very least, it should expand ones consciousness in trying to unravel the difficulties in the way of coming to a definite conclusion.

I agree. How do you percieve without reasoning btw?