# Lekatt's Thread: The \*only\* place to find out about Lekatt's beliefs! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 7, 2010, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273 "2010-04-07T14:05:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/281 "2010-04-13T17:47:33Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > I read your link to consciousness and found it interesting. Consciousness is described as chemicals, but the author does it in a “suggesting” format. There is no evidence, just the opinion of the author. This is true about the functions of the brain also. Most authors do not state they have found consciousness, but merely writing about their model or opinion of how they think it would work. > > All things are energy, you, the “I am” contains all memory, knowledge, emotions, and other components of consciousness or self-awareness within. When the body and brain dies, you, the “I am” exists in energy form and continues to live without a physical body or brain. Is calling everything on one side of the debate “suggestions” and everything on the other side “knowledge” intellectually honest in your opinion, **lekatt**? ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/282 "2010-04-13T18:20:18Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > When I read that and then ask about it, I was thinking similar thoughts. What I read was “a nail is aware that it is a nail.” If a nail rusts, does it become aware that it has changed from iron to iron oxide? If so, how does the process work? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/283 "2010-04-13T19:44:11Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > If a nail rusts, does it become aware that it has changed from iron to iron oxide? If so, how does the process work? I don’t know, but it could be possible. Everything comes from the Oneness into the physical duality. When its life or usefulness is over here it returns to the Oneness. Nothing is lost. The universe is love creating and recreating itself over and over. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/284 "2010-04-13T19:57:07Z")
Could you please answer the questions posed in posts #201 and #281, **lekatt**? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/285 "2010-04-13T20:07:03Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > How is consciousness manifested in pencils? Writing? ---
**Author:** ![Hey\_Hey\_Paula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hey\_Hey\_Paula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hey_Hey_Paula)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/286 "2010-04-13T21:32:50Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Where in my post did I even come _close_ to complaining about your link?!? I _want_ people to read that link! > > BTW, the correct quote is “Methinks thou doth protest too much.”-Hamlet, act III, scene II. Actually, it’s “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.” said by the Queen, referring to the Player Queen going on and on about never marrying again. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/287 "2010-04-13T21:46:03Z")
> [@Hey\_Hey\_Paula](#): > > Actually, it’s “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.” said by the Queen, referring to the Player Queen going on and on about never marrying again. That’s funny-I thought the original quote was " The lady doth protest too much, methinks." ---
**Author:** ![deanc2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/53a042/32.png) [@deanc2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/deanc2000)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/288 "2010-04-13T23:01:07Z")
Alright, I’ve read about 5 pages of this thread. Lekatt, you believe that “consciousness”, is separate from the brain. You have some “evidence”, although, it’s all really anecdotal, which is evidence, but it’s not strong evidence. Strong evidence would be double blind, placebo controlled studies. So the evidence is weak. Let’s just move on and hypothetically assume what lekatt believes is TRUE. Lekatt, I don’t know what happens when I’ll die. I’m terrified of the event just like everybody else, but it seems like you know what happens. Tell me about the world after death? Where do we all live? Is there a Heaven or a hell? Are there actual sexes? Are there genders? Without mouths, how do we communicate? What do we do with our time? Do we go to jobs? Earn money? Watch tv? What is life like being a bodiless spirit? Dean. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/289 "2010-04-13T23:17:20Z")
> [@deanc2000](#): > > Without mouths, how do we communicate? I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure we must scream. I asked earlier, and I ask again - how do I go about having one of these NDE things myself. Preferably, _without_ throwing myself in front of a bus. How do I get a risk-free OBE like **lekatt** had? I’ve tried napping, but that hasn’t worked; all I have are ordinary dreams. I wanna spirit guide. I’d have it check the mailbox for me each day to see if there was anything worth getting up and going and fetching. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2010, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/290 "2010-04-13T23:40:46Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > I read your link to consciousness and found it interesting. Consciousness is described as chemicals, but the author does it in a “suggesting” format. There is no evidence, just the opinion of the author. This is true about the functions of the brain also. Most authors do not state they have found consciousness, but merely writing about their model or opinion of how they think it would work. > > All things are energy, you, the “I am” contains all memory, knowledge, emotions, and other components of consciousness or self-awareness within. When the body and brain dies, you, the “I am” exists in energy form and continues to live without a physical body or brain. I’d have to echo **Czarcasm** ’s sentiment, it seems disingenuous to dismiss the findings of qualified neurologists as simply their opinion, yet claiming your own side as concrete fact. Are you aware of a man named [Roger Sperry](http://nobelprize.org/educational_games/medicine/split-brain/background.html)? He won the Nobel Prize Physiology or Medicine in 1981, for his ‘Split Brain’ experiments, which gave us a greater understanding of brain hemispheres, which most definitely effect conciousness: > [@](#): > > In the 1960s, there was no other cure for people who suffered from a special kind of epilepsy than by cutting off the connection, corpus callosum, between the two hemispheres. **Epilepsy is a kind of storm in the brain, which is caused by the excessive signaling of nerve cells** , and in these patients, the brain storm was prevented from spreading to the other hemisphere when the corpus callosum was cut off. **This made it possible for the patients to live a normal life after the operation, and it was only when carrying out these experiments one could notice their somewhat “odd behavior.”** > > Each hemisphere is still able to learn after the split brain operation but one hemisphere has no idea about what the other hemisphere has experienced or learned. Today, new methods and technology in split brain operation make it possible to cut off only a tiny portion and not the whole of the corpus callosum of patients. > > The studies demonstrated that the left and right hemispheres are specialized in different tasks. The left side of the brain is normally specialized in taking care of the analytical and verbal tasks. The left side speaks much better than the right side, while the right half takes care of the space perception tasks and music, for example. The right hemisphere is involved when you are making a map or giving directions on how to get to your home from the bus station. The right hemisphere can only produce rudimentary words and phrases, but contributes emotional context to language. Without the help from the right hemisphere, you would be able to read the word “pig” for instance, but you wouldn’t be able to imagine what it is. Where is the outside force in all this? “Energy” is one of those annoying vague new-agey words that can mean whatever you want. If you’re referring to electrical charges in the brain, well yes, we can actually measure them with EEGs and know what causes it. > [@](#): > > Neurons create action potentials, which are discrete electrical signals that travel down axons and cause the release of chemical neurotransmitters at the synapse, which is an area of near contact between two neurons. This neurotransmitter then activates a receptor in the dendrite or body of the neuron that is on the other side of the synapse, the post-synaptic neuron. The neurotransmitter, when combined with the receptor, typically causes an electrical current within the dendrite or body of the post-synaptic neuron. Thousands of post-synaptic currents from a single neuron’s dendrites and body then sum up to cause the neuron to generate an action potential. This neuron then synapses on other neurons, and so on. > **[Electroencephalography](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroencephalography)** > > Electroencephalography (EEG) > is a method to record an electrogram of the spontaneous electrical activity of the brain. The bio signals detected by EEG have been shown to represent the postsynaptic potentials of pyramidal neurons in the neocortex and allocortex. It is typically non-invasive, with the EEG electrodes placed along the scalp (commonly called "scalp EEG") using the International 10–20 system, or variations of it. Electrocorticography, involving surgical placement of electrodes, i Vo... Again we know that neurons form this “energy”, if you want to call it that, by themselves. I forgot wiki in talking about information regarding conciousness, slightly easier to understand if you ask me. Part your believe curtains for this: > [@](#): > > Neurophysiological studies in awake, behaving monkeys point to advanced cortical areas in prefrontal cortex and temporal lobes as carriers of neuronal correlates of consciousness. Christof Koch and Francis Crick argue that **neuronal mechanisms of consciousness are intricately related to prefrontal cortex — cortical areas involved in higher cognitive function, affect, behavioral control, and planning.** Rodolfo Llinas proposes that consciousness results from recurrent thalamo-cortical resonance where the specific thalamocortical systems (content) and the non-specific (centromedial thalamus) thalamocortical systems (context) interact in the gamma band frequency via time coincidence. According to this view the “I” represents a global predictive function required for intentionality.[27][28] Experimental work of Steven Wise, Mikhail Lebedev and their colleagues supports this view. They demonstrated that activity of prefrontal cortex neurons reflects illusory perceptions of movements of visual stimuli. Nikos Logothetis and colleagues made similar observations on visually responsive neurons in the temporal lobe. These neurons reflect the visual perception in the situation when conflicting visual images are presented to different eyes (i.e., bistable percepts during binocular rivalry). The studies of blindsight — vision without awareness after lesions to parts of the visual system such as the primary visual cortex — performed by Lawrence Weiskrantz and David P. Carey provided important insights on **how conscious perception arises in the brain.** > **[Consciousness](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conciousness#Cognitive_psychology_and_cognitive_neuroscience)** > > Consciousness, in its simplest form, is awareness of states or objects either internal to one's self or in one's external environment. However, its complex nature has led to extensive explanations, analyses, and debate among philosophers, scientists, and theologians for millennia. There is no consensus on what exactly needs to be studied, or even if consciousness can be considered a scientific concept. In some explanations, it is synonymous with mind, while in others it is considered an aspect... The wiki cites two books on this specific subject; Llinas R.. (2001) “I of the Vortex. From Neurons to Self” MIT Press, Cambridge Llinas R.,Ribary, U. Contreras, D. and Pedroarena, C. (1998) “The neuronal basis for consciousness” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, B. 353:1841-1849 We don’t know all there is to know about the brain, but this doesn’t give credence to non-sequiturs and wish-thinking. The ‘I’ could indeed be described as electrical charges/neuron signals, but it requires a physical component. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/291 "2010-04-14T07:08:23Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > No prob. > > Okay. Panpsychism. Huh. > > I see two different (unrelated) aspects of this theory: > > 1. the entire universe is one entity that possesses a mind, and all us little planets and mortals and pencils and whatnot are just cogs in that machine. I find this a hard sell for a materialist because of the information transmission problem; the only real methods of communication between the disparate parts of the universe are gravity and light - and gravity attenuates rapidly and both have the speed of light limit. So the left hand won’t know what the right hand is doing. Well, some people believe long-distance (like, parsecs) communication is possible by separating the components of a photon and manipulating them in some kind of code. But I doubt it. Also- I seem to remember that the mathematics describing the Big Bang required something like 22 dimensions? Is this really true? What kind of dimensions are they, and if they exist could they not make the kinds of limitations you describe irrelevant? A Universal Mind would necessarily contain all the dimensions of a Big Bang, even if they are not accessible to us. Or, yeah, the concept may be so problematic that it isn’t workable. > [@](#): > > 1. all parts of matter “involve mind”. _All_ parts of matter? Atoms? Electrons? These things are conscious? With thoughts? Memories? Where do they _store_ these thoughts and memories? And how do these minds interact with the universe? Do these entities percieve things? How? As best I can tell, atoms don’t have eyeballs or ears. Are they all trapped forever in a sensory deprivation nightmare of madness and misery? And of course even if these little minds _wanted_ to get together in committee meetings and via pure democratic voting form a larger aggregate mind in that pencil, they have no way of communicating with each other to do so, so objects as people think of them can’t have minds in any meaningful way, unless they build them entirely separately out of macro-level interactions among chemicals and brain cells. > > Seriously, I don’t see how a materialist can even begin to entertain this theory. Even _theorizing_ this is cruelty to atoms, and doesn’t get you anywhere you want to be. To clear this up, let me repeat just one line: > [@](#): > > This is not to say that panpsychism believes that all matter is alive or even conscious but rather that the constituent parts of matter are composed of some form of mind and are sentient. You might say that a neutron can perceive things in its immediate environment, but has no memory or identity. So it only expresses a constituent part of mind. Perhaps in concert with the greater whole it plays a constructive role. So no, they aren’t pyschologically shut-in, senseless beings. They’re bits of brain-lego. > [@](#): > > Define “living”. Seriously! We’re materialists, so no souls. No metaphysical to fall back on. So what’s the difference between living-person-before-bludgeoning, and dead-person-after-bludgeoning? > > Here’s your answer: it’s the processes that are running, or not. And processes can be simulated - or if we take into account that there’s lots of different kinds of processes that we consider to be living (compare your processes to a tree’s processes), why couldn’t a computer have entirely different processes and still be “alive”? Theoretically speaking? Well, I did try to give an introduction with some historical thought on the subject. Apparently a complex organism has this ‘prana’ stuff running all through its nadi. Something might happen and the prana spills out, and you’re left with a dead critter. A computer is a contrasting case- you can turn it on or off and on again, it isn’t an active structure relying on prana. Theoretically speaking. > [@](#): > > I am. Minds are all over the place - from really complicated to really simple to ones that make Deep Blue look halfway clever, given that it’s basically blind and deaf. How ‘all over the place’ do you think minds are? Don’t you consider it the least bit possible that ‘mind’ is itself a constituent part of matter? Before you answer, realize we’re materialists, and we also experience minds. > [@](#): > > I have **no idea** what your point is. Nadis? What the hey? Ancient mysticism and alchemy tell us what now? Yah I know. It is a confusing topic for me. The article says prana is not a material thing. But I’m told kundalini energy is in fact physical energy. Kundalini flows through nadi just like prana, so it is possible that prana is in fact material too. But prana is compared to qi. Qi has been exposed as not physical (as a prelude to cracking down on Qi Gong). Its defenders retreated to metaphor and other techniques, and pointed out that Qi Gong is pretty close to just hanging out in the park. The whole reference is part of an attempt to define living, in the context of death and near-death and experience and all that. And to argue with you, too. The nadi lines correspond to acupuncture meridians. Did these two studies arise independently, or were they in concert? In any case both systems appear to refer to the same ‘knowledge’, or idea or whatever it is. Apparently acupuncture really works: stick real needles into the actual lines to get predictable results. So… if it isn’t physical, it reacts to physical stimuli… All this is kind of ‘woo’, but not so much that I can’t keep a straight face. And the symbology for this was adopted as the symbol for Western medicine, as if maybe these concepts are the starting points of modern medical science. > [@](#): > > Certanly technology is currently less complicated than the human mind. (Well, the software, anyway. Neurons aren’t _that_ much awesomer than transistors in the abstract.) But I’ve been saying all along that they’re just similar in type, not that they’re on a par in complexity at the moment. When (if) they _do_ approach our complexity level you’ll know, because they’ll be demanding the right to vote. Or’ll have killed us all. Whichever. Well… neurons do have the capacity for massive connectivity, while transistors do not… neurons literally live their function, while a circuit board is matter hammered out to the outlines of science concerning just one part of matter: electrons. To me, neurons have vastly more depth compared to transistors. > [@](#): > > What’s a “being”? Alive. Conscious. Self-aware. If some kind of cognition isn’t already implied, throw that in. > [@](#): > > How does the computer “reflect” consiousness, other than being the same kind of thing only less complex (at the moment)? It is like the abstraction I described in the first post. Maybe scientists will figure out the secret to life and what machinery of matter makes it possible. Still, a computer simulation of the model would only be so much math. It wouldn’t literally exist as a personality in the physical world. It might be a perfect description, but it would not be the thing itself. Not that it might not be cool anyway, or pass for a mind say, interacting on a website or something… > [@](#): > > 1. DNA doesn’t participate in consciousness. it’s just a storage mechanism. And one can store exactly the same data with binary - you know, by storing larger numbers in _binary_. Here’s your quaternary: 00, 01, 10, 11. (Serously, much :dubious:😕 here.) Maybe I wandered a little bit there. But the blueprint for neurons (and beings, really) is found in DNA. The blueprint for circuit boards is circuitry. Seems like a major difference to me. > [@](#): > > 1. The confines of a circuit _suck_. You basically have no senses! A plug from the keyboard that _occasionally_ shoots a few electrons your way. Another from the mouse. A somewhat noiser one from the ethernet card. Sensors, but not senses. > [@](#): > > You think you’re special as a squishy organic meat-puppet? You are, but not because you have a mind. It’s because you have all these really _really_ information-dense and constantly-updated inputs that are hardwired into your grey matter. If humans hadn’t evolved to have those, you wouldn’t have a mind either. Yes, but that is what is really interesting about this debate. You’re right. The machinery seems to be an integral part. But the experience itself, the actual, subjective experience, does not seem to have the aspect of matter. Doesn’t it seem to be another category of ‘thing’? > [@](#): > > 1. In-time subjective experience _are_ a series of calculations. It’s your brain doing stuff to itself inside itself. That’s calculations. You’re a materialist, remember? But you are going right back to the beginning of the debate here. We’re materialists, but we experience mind. To resolve the conflict, it appears that something like at least panprotoexperientialism is required: > [@](#): > > Panprotoexperientialism is a more cautious variation still, which credits all entities with non-physical properties that are precursors to phenomenal consciousness (or phenomenal consciousness in a latent, undeveloped form) but not with cognition itself, or with conscious awareness. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/292 "2010-04-14T13:17:46Z")
> [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > I’d have to echo **Czarcasm** ’s sentiment, it seems disingenuous to dismiss the findings of qualified neurologists as simply their opinion, yet claiming your own side as concrete fact. > > Are you aware of a man named [Roger Sperry](http://nobelprize.org/educational_games/medicine/split-brain/background.html)? He won the Nobel Prize Physiology or Medicine in 1981, for his ‘Split Brain’ experiments, which gave us a greater understanding of brain hemispheres, which most definitely effect conciousness: > > Where is the outside force in all this? > > “Energy” is one of those annoying vague new-agey words that can mean whatever you want. If you’re referring to electrical charges in the brain, well yes, we can actually measure them with EEGs and know what causes it. > > [Electroencephalography - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroencephalography#Source_of_EEG_activity) > Again we know that neurons form this “energy”, if you want to call it that, by themselves. > > I forgot wiki in talking about information regarding conciousness, slightly easier to understand if you ask me. Part your believe curtains for this: > > [Consciousness - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conciousness#Cognitive_psychology_and_cognitive_neuroscience) > The wiki cites two books on this specific subject; > Llinas R.. (2001) “I of the Vortex. From Neurons to Self” MIT Press, Cambridge > Llinas R.,Ribary, U. Contreras, D. and Pedroarena, C. (1998) “The neuronal basis for consciousness” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, B. 353:1841-1849 > > We don’t know all there is to know about the brain, but this doesn’t give credence to non-sequiturs and wish-thinking. The ‘I’ could indeed be described as electrical charges/neuron signals, but it requires a physical component. The “I” is pure energy, and so is everything else, remember Einstein, so the spiritual “I” could contact the brain at the level of where energy becomes matter. No one can prove the brain creates the activity measured on its surface. Is there activity on the surface of the liver? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/293 "2010-04-14T13:40:30Z")
What kind of energy is the “I”? Is it measurable, like electricity, or heat, or other forms of energy we are familiar with? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/294 "2010-04-14T13:45:54Z")
> [@deanc2000](#): > > Alright, I’ve read about 5 pages of this thread. Lekatt, you believe that “consciousness”, is separate from the brain. You have some “evidence”, although, it’s all really anecdotal, which is evidence, but it’s not strong evidence. Strong evidence would be double blind, placebo controlled studies. > > So the evidence is weak. > > Let’s just move on and hypothetically assume what lekatt believes is TRUE. > > Lekatt, I don’t know what happens when I’ll die. I’m terrified of the event just like everybody else, but it seems like you know what happens. > > Tell me about the world after death? Where do we all live? Is there a Heaven or a hell? Are there actual sexes? Are there genders? Without mouths, how do we communicate? What do we do with our time? Do we go to jobs? Earn money? Watch tv? What is life like being a bodiless spirit? > > Dean. None of the evidence is anecdotal, stories are not researched. What is researched is can a person who is clinically dead still observe and report events that took place while he was clinically dead. The answer is yes, multiple times. There are called veridical NDEs. Speaking from the point of a classical near death experience, you will find yourself out of your body and looking down upon it. A realization will set in that you are dead, but you will feel the same as you always did, but lighter, you will be able to think clearly, and see clearly. You will notice a light and be drawn into the light, as you near the light you will feel loved, cared for, accepted, like a prodigal son returning home. The best of everything layed out for you. Huge amounts of knowledge will be yours for the asking. You will recognize the place and acknowledge you have been here before. You are home. There is no gender or sex in the spirit realms. Communication and movement is done by thought, thought is very important here in the physical also. There are plenty of jobs, but no money. Jobs must be earned through spiritual growth. A lot of things are similar, like museums, hall of records, schools, houses, etc. Some pursue art, or poetry and great literature. Some just rest up from the stress of the physical. There are no banks, or money, but barter is ok. No justice system, no politicians, the spiritual world is run by natural law. The law of you will receive what you give. The law of love. There are different levels, and you will find yourself on a level with others of similar spiritual growth. As you gain spiritual knowledge and grow you will move to higher levels. Folks from high levels can visit you, but you can’t visit them until you have earned the right. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/295 "2010-04-14T15:01:51Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > The “I” is pure energy, and so is everything else, remember Einstein, so the spiritual “I” could contact the brain at the level of where energy becomes matter. No one can prove the brain creates the activity measured on its surface. Is there activity on the surface of the liver? Not sure why you’re bringing up Einstein’s name, his most famous equation directly contradicts your idea that pure energy just floats around completely undetectable; “The equation E = mc2 indicates that **energy always exhibits mass in whatever form the energy takes**.[3] **It does not imply that mass may be “converted” to energy** , for modern theory holds that neither mass nor energy may be destroyed, but only moved from one location to another. In physics, mass must be differentiated from matter. In cases where matter particles are created or destroyed, the precursors and products retain both the original mass and energy, which is unchanged. Mass–energy equivalence also means that mass conservation becomes a restatement of the law of energy conservation, which is the first law of thermodynamics.” > **[Mass–energy equivalence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence)** > > In physics, mass–energy equivalence is the relationship between mass and energy in a system's rest frame. The two differ only by a multiplicative constant and the units of measurement. The principle is described by the physicist Albert Einstein's formula:  > > > > E > = > m > > c > > 2 > > > > > {\\displaystyle E=mc^{2}} > > . In a reference frame where the system is moving, its relativistic energy and r The form... I suggest you re-read my prior post, as we _can_ prove that the brain creates activity measured on its surface, see [action potential.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_potential) You asked if the liver has activity…of course. > [@](#): > > All cells in animal body tissues are electrically polarized—in other words, they maintain a voltage difference across the cell’s plasma membrane, known as the membrane potential. This electrical polarization results from a complex interplay between protein structures embedded in the membrane called ion pumps and ion channels. From the wiki on action potential. Not to mention all the chemical and heat energy in all parts of the human body. From that question I’m not sure you understand what ‘energy’ actual is in the human body. You might want to read up on [chemical thermodynamics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_thermodynamics) on chemical energy (we get our energy from food, in other words chemicals. Then we turn it into kinetic energy for movement, heat energy exhibited by body heat, electrical energy in our nerves, etc). What is your response to research done my qualified neurologists that conciousness does reside in the brain, and that the prefrontal cortex ([seriously, there are books about this stuff](http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lZu56g5-IigC&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=prefrontal+cortex&source=bl&ots=RDvWqTRyRz&sig=FwcNv3FgjIbCWpQYZooAOBtAXa8&hl=en&ei=CNfFS-iVAZKi0gS1mY3SDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=14&ved=0CDkQ6AEwDQ#v=onepage&q&f=false)) is crucial in forming conciousness, in addition to research suggesting that the entire brain and workings of its neural links are involved (see [this](http://cogprints.org/3891/); “Neuroanatomical and neurophysiological evidence is offered in support of the existence of single neurons that may individually receive dendritic input of sufficient complexity and diversity to **account for the full content of conscious experience** , and of an arrangement in which the output of multiple such neurons summate to achieve amplification of the individually emitted messages. An ultramicroscopic extension of the theory is suggested as a way of moving forward on the philosophically difficult aspects of the mind/brain problem.”)? Two questions about your last posts - firstly, how do you know all this stuff, and secondly, is this universal and eternal? The ‘energy’ of rapists and murderers floating alongside that of doctors and charity workers? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/296 "2010-04-14T16:13:50Z")
> [@Mr.Kobayashi](#): > > Not sure why you’re bringing up Einstein’s name, his most famous equation directly contradicts your idea that pure energy just floats around completely undetectable; > “The equation E = mc2 indicates that **energy always exhibits mass in whatever form the energy takes**.[3] **It does not imply that mass may be “converted” to energy** , for modern theory holds that neither mass nor energy may be destroyed, but only moved from one location to another. In physics, mass must be differentiated from matter. In cases where matter particles are created or destroyed, the precursors and products retain both the original mass and energy, which is unchanged. Mass–energy equivalence also means that mass conservation becomes a restatement of the law of energy conservation, which is the first law of thermodynamics.” > [Mass–energy equivalence - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence) > > I suggest you re-read my prior post, as we _can_ prove that the brain creates activity measured on its surface, see [action potential.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_potential) You asked if the liver has activity…of course. > > From the wiki on action potential. > > Not to mention all the chemical and heat energy in all parts of the human body. From that question I’m not sure you understand what ‘energy’ actual is in the human body. You might want to read up on [chemical thermodynamics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_thermodynamics) on chemical energy (we get our energy from food, in other words chemicals. Then we turn it into kinetic energy for movement, heat energy exhibited by body heat, electrical energy in our nerves, etc). > > What is your response to research done my qualified neurologists that conciousness does reside in the brain, and that the prefrontal cortex ([seriously, there are books about this stuff](http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=lZu56g5-IigC&pg=PA131&lpg=PA131&dq=prefrontal+cortex&source=bl&ots=RDvWqTRyRz&sig=FwcNv3FgjIbCWpQYZooAOBtAXa8&hl=en&ei=CNfFS-iVAZKi0gS1mY3SDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=14&ved=0CDkQ6AEwDQ#v=onepage&q&f=false)) is crucial in forming conciousness, in addition to research suggesting that the entire brain and workings of its neural links are involved (see [this](http://cogprints.org/3891/); “Neuroanatomical and neurophysiological evidence is offered in support of the existence of single neurons that may individually receive dendritic input of sufficient complexity and diversity to **account for the full content of conscious experience** , and of an arrangement in which the output of multiple such neurons summate to achieve amplification of the individually emitted messages. An ultramicroscopic extension of the theory is suggested as a way of moving forward on the philosophically difficult aspects of the mind/brain problem.”)? > > Two questions about your last posts - firstly, how do you know all this stuff, and secondly, is this universal and eternal? The ‘energy’ of rapists and murderers floating alongside that of doctors and charity workers? I appreciate all the links to “suggested” ways the brain may create consciousness, but they are all models, opinions, and such. There is no evidence that the brain creates consciousness. But there is evidence, and a lot of it, that consciousness can live outside the brain after the brain ceases to produce activity. After the brain and body are dead. Why not pay some attention to the real evidence instead of the opinions. I know this stuff through my near death experience, and subsequent spiritual experiences afterward. I think I have said that before. There are millions of near death experiencers. Some with greater spiritual knowledge than others, it just depends on how hard you work at it. Your energy just don’t float around, there are specific things to do, and I don’t judge others, I am not the one who says. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/297 "2010-04-14T16:20:41Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > I know this stuff through my near death experience… According to your own blog, you didn’t have and NDE at all. If what you wrote down was true, at _best_ what you experienced was an OBE, although it reads as if you had a waking dream. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/298 "2010-04-14T16:23:44Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > What kind of energy is the “I”? Is it measurable, like electricity, or heat, or other forms of energy we are familiar with? Energy is a convenient physical word. I have heard the word “vitality” or “essence” used as synonyms for energy. No, it is not something we are familiar with nor can measure. At least as far as I now know. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Kobayashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4af34b/32.png) [@Mr.Kobayashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Kobayashi)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/299 "2010-04-14T16:27:27Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > I appreciate all the links to “suggested” ways the brain may create consciousness, but they are all models, opinions, and such. There is no evidence that the brain creates consciousness. But there is evidence, and a lot of it, that consciousness can live outside the brain after the brain ceases to produce activity. After the brain and body are dead. Why not pay some attention to the real evidence instead of the opinions. > > I know this stuff through my near death experience, and subsequent spiritual experiences afterward. I think I have said that before. There are millions of near death experiencers. Some with greater spiritual knowledge than others, it just depends on how hard you work at it. Your energy just don’t float around, there are specific things to do, and I don’t judge others, I am not the one who says. I thought you might focus in on the language, which is also present in a paper by Sperry; "Challenges the assumption that the subjective phenomena of conscious experiences do not exert any causal influence on the sequence of events in the physical brain process. A theory of mind is suggested in which consciousness, interpreted to be a direct emergent property of cerebral activity, is conceived to be an integral component of the brain process that functions as an essential constituent of the action and exerts a directive holistic form of control over the flow pattern of cerebral excitation. " > **[APA PsycNet](https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1970-01839-001)** Again, you’ll likely pick holes in this - “theory”, “suggested”, “interpreted”. This is simply scientific language, and appropriate for the topic. I’d wager a point of agreement is that the brain (like most of our universe) is not yet fully understood, meaning any theory about it requires this type of language. Like I said earlier, the essence of scientific method is that any theory it is open to scrutiny and revision as new evidence comes up, nothing is absolute 100% concrete fact, as you are claiming for your side. You are dismissing offhand the findings of Nobel Prize winning neurologists as ‘opinions’. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2010, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273/300 "2010-04-14T16:34:50Z")
re: post #201, what was the surgery you refused to go to the hospital for? You implied it had something to do with your OBE, but you’ve also said before you didn’t go to a doctor anytime soon after the incident. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lekatts-thread-the-only-place-to-find-out-about-lekatts-beliefs/535273.md?page=16)