Feeling of self

For me, my feeling of self has led me to believe in God.I think therefore I am.I attribute my feeling of self to my spirit, which was created by God.I see that others in here, who may or may not believe in God, also have a feeling of self. There even seems to be some sort of separation of science and this feeling of self, in that people have responded that science cannot explain all things, like right and wrong, and purpose in life. Subjective things.My question is, what do you attribute your feeling of self to?
What gives us the freedom of thought, or free will that say maybe a tree doesn't have?

It depends on what you mean by 'Feelings of self'. I do not remember when I do not have a 'feeling of self',My 'conciousness' does not have an awareness of other 'conciousness's' other than those I physcially interact with. I don't get a 'feeling' that someone else is there in my brain, just me.

riVeRrat The impression of a self floating in the skull as though it were a seperate entity is an illusion produced by the activity of the brain in concert with a lack of neural feedback to allow the brain to sense itself.This message has been edited by sidelined, Tue, 2006-03-21 10:53 AM

i think a tree has the same free will. what's to say you are more alive than a tree? all living things are fighting against chaos and will eventually fail. by passing our line on, we win the battle.is there a god? does it matter? it doesn't make me any more or less alive to say there is or is not a god.

Where'd He come from? It seems there is a step missing somewhere. The feeling of self comes from my brain. The presence of a brain at all differentiates me from a tree, greater analytical capacity gives me greater freedom of thought than members of most other species if not all.I have no knowledge if Gods exist or what relation they play in all of this.This message has been edited by holmes, 03-22-2006 12:03 AM

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Perhaps he is referring to what we might call the "argument from incorporeality." The mind is incorporeal, and thus could not have come from nature. So there exists something beyond nature from whence this incorporeal thing, the self, came.

That's all I'm talking about, just you, and where do you think your feeling of self comes from.

So would you categorize it as objective? Since you seem to have an objective explanation for it?

In what sense?
Can it make decisions? Can it think for itself?
Does it wonder why he doesn't have legs? If I said that, I would be a ego maniac. I don't understand, what does that have to do with my question?

No, I am not saying that. The mind could have very well have come from nature, but nature came from God, is my belief.But it is more the spirit, the one I feel God gave me, and my soul.Where in the body these things reside, remains to be seen. But I feel the difference between my spirit and soul, unless I am just schizophrenic. Like Slim shady, there is 3 sides to him.But then there is always the question of if your mind gets damaged, does this affect your soul/spirit? I would say it affects your soul, but not your spirit. I have damaged my own mind enough, but yet my spirit remains unchanged.

i don't know. i might see a tree tomorrow. i will ask it.all plants grow against gravity and grow in different directions to avoid wind damage. i think that's mighty demonstrative of their permitted free will. i'm sure if trees had legs, they'd walk to better climates. no. if you said that, you'd be referencing your belief that people should have children and beat down chaos because that is their purpose. i am suggesting that if one wants to fight chaos, one might decide to have children. or decide to study theoretical math. either will work come to think of it.

.
​
. .
​
.
​
. .
​
.     .
​
. .   . .
​

you suggested that your feeling of self, your cogito ergo sum leads you to believe in god. i am asking why cogito ergo deus? deus ex machina?i believe my feeling of self comes from my feeling of self. and if that sounds difficult for you, you should take a camping trip in my head sometime. then it will seem like the simplest thing ever... if only because everything else is so damned complicated and convoluted.This message has been edited by brennakimi, 03-21-2006 11:17 PM

riVeRrat Well, the word subjective is used by humans as a means of labeling the category of experience that comes from the activity of the personal mind so it is subjective in that sense, however ,the brain is wrongly assigning the impression of this activity as belonging to an entity existing seperate from the body.This is perfectly consonant with the notion that the world as a material structure is capable of producing these impressions from strictly physical phenomena. It is therefore also an objective effect that we subjectively interpret.I hope this does more to clarify than confuse.

---

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
Douglas Adams

That's what I was asking but put so much more cleverly.

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

It might be better for your argument if you didn't multiply all these entities. Just settle on one. "Mind" will do as well or better than the others. The Mind is the self is the spirit is the soul.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 03-22-2006 06:58 AM

It is not an argument. It's a question, and everyone can answer how they choose.But I see inconsistencies in that people have claimed that science cannot explain all things, like purpose, and right from wrong, subjective things, yet some people try to objectively explain feeling of self here.