Hi Xain,
But we are not looking for ideas here - We are looking for the actual 'thing' responsible!
Do you actually experience 'a pair of eyes' seeing the screen? Is that really the experience?
In direct experience, something sees. I suppose it could be the idea that eyes see, but when they are closed, they don't see, so it's pretty hard to logically say it is not the eyes seeing the screen, or the heart beating, or etc.
But we are not looking for ideas here - We are looking for the actual 'thing' responsible!
without any of these senses, the body would be dead - honestly don't know if there would be anything experienced after that.
Do you actually experience 'a pair of eyes' seeing the screen? Is that really the experience?
seeing is experienced. Do not actually experience the eyes seeing, but visually, seeing is not experienced when the eyes are closed.
Do you experience an 'I', a separate self seeing the screen?
No.
What about a BMO doing it?
Yes, something sees and without the body/eyes, how can anything be seen?
Can anything be found that is doing the seeing in the actual experience itself - Other than an idea of something individual and separate that is responsible for it?
I don't think I am following very well. The experience is - seeing something, don't know what is responsible for seeing. All I know is seeing happens and when eyes are closed seeing doesn't happen.
Well you suggested 'eyes' were doing the seeing, and previously 'BMO' was doing the seeing.
yes, eyes/BMO/physical sense/whatever - something sees and when eyes are shut, nothing visually sees.
There's nothing wrong with these ideas - They can be useful. But are they anything more than ideas?
I get lost here because it doesn't seem like seeing is an idea. If eyes are open they see, if they are shut they don't. that is what is found in direct experience.
f your answer 'I don't know what is doing it' is because it is clear that all the things you can come up with are just ideas - Just say so.
I don't think that is it - it is not clear they are ideas. I don't know what is doing it, but it doesn't seem like an idea.
We can continue from there. That's where I trying to head for. But be honest.
Trying to be honest - all this physical stuff - in direct experience - Seeing happens, but when eyes are closed it doesn't. hearing happens, but when ears are plugged, no go. etc. Speaking outside of the physical in the realm of thought it is different - there things/concepts whatever are clearly ideas.
Yes, this goes against everything we THINK is happening. But you must be honest here. What do you find?
Doesn't seem like i can get out of this - it is the physical stuff that doesn't seem like an idea, but physical facts.
Ok - So in the experience, it is clear for you then that there are two definate parts - The feeling itself, and the skin that is doing the feeling, yes? Is that really what you find in the experience?
Not clear that there are two parts... there is just the feeling and that feeling originates from the skin.
Or is 'skin doing the feeling' just an idea - Just as much as 'brain interprets the nerve impulses from the skin' would be? Or 'electrical signal goes from the skin to the brain along a nerve' would be?
Just the feeling, and it originates from the skin, if the skin weren't there it doesn't seem like the feeling would be either.
I suppose it could be an assumption that it comes from the skin, just like seeing comes from the eyes - can't figure out anything about it - no eyes, no sight. No skin, no tactile sensation.
thanks,
John
