I think that essence is a really difficult thing to define.
encode_decide used the word abstract with regard to flow.
I think that essence is also abstract.
Perhaps as in abstract art, one needs to stand further away from it in order to see it more clearly or to experience it more clearly.
But thatâs just it, Wendy. Iâm not thinking in terms of how we ourselves change, with reference to this thing we call our self.
When we look at a diamond or any gem and itâs different facets most of them shine differently appear to be different. What is it how is it made in such a way that it is different?
Can that be its essence and I think that I have just refuted myself with this example.
But somehow I intuit that our essence does change. I may be perfectly wrong here.
Maybe the greater question is why do I see it this way.
What is essence? Iâm not looking for the dictionaryâs definition.
My logic may be completely off as i am not the most logical being going.
But from that perspective, encode_decode, couldnât you say that the essence of the river is the same as the essence of a glass with water in it?
And that the essence of the ocean is the same essence as that of a river?
And that the essence of a waterfall or a torrential rain is the same essence as that of a river?
Is water itself actually the essence of these things or just a part of its true essence?
Doesnât essence have much more to do with what goes deeper, with what makes something what it is individually? I include rivers as individuals here or maybe itâs better to say entities too.
I may not have expressed that well.
I still do not think that essence is so easily defined. But donât we also define god so easily?
And canât those deeper unseen things which define a thing change?
lol Maybe ~ maybe not. But we can actually see flow, both in a river and in a person, can we not?
What a real beauty that little tiger cub is.
I wonder what is going on within his consciousness - if only I could read what is behind his eyes - and donât say that he has no consciousness.
Heâs smart enough to hang near the boulder. Do you see how his colors are almost the same as that in the boulder?
Ps: At the risk of sounding foolish, you donât really have a tiger cub, do you?
Would you happen to have a little wolf cub available for me? I love wolves - all animals actually.
Wendy, Iâm not just considering physical change, Iâm considering mental change as well (if anything changes, itâs the mind). Other than those twoâbody and mindâIâm not sure what else there is. The âselfâ is something we project onto ourselves.
Think of it this way: the soul, to me, is like Northern Lights. If you look up at the Northern Lights one late evening, it looks like glowing waves splashing high above the atmosphere. You could keep your eye fixed on one streak or one wave and watch it dancing around with the othersâit may stretch, bend, split in two, join with another, and even change colorâthis is how I imagine the soulânever remaining still, always changingâbut you can still identify it, you can still keep your eye fixed on a particular stretch of light and watch it as it moves around, changes shape, goes through different colors, and all the while say âYep, itâs the same stretch of light.â â I think we can say the same of the soul: even though itâs never the same from moment to moment, we can still identify it, saying, âthatâs the same soul I had yesterday, I remember being that soul, and I remember my seamless experience from then to now.â
If itâs a question of whether the soul will survive death, that has nothing to do with the permanence or fluctuation of the soul. Think of it like a student taking a course. From the beginning of the semester to the end, the student is undergoing constant changeâcells are being replaced, personality changes, new memories are formed, more skills and knowledge are acquiredâbut then what does the professor say after the final exam: âSorry, kid, canât let you pass. Youâre not the same person who registered for the course.â â Of course not! You think God would reject you in the afterlife because you technically go through change in this life?
You are still hung up, blinded by your perceptions of what is physical. Is every aspect of being physical to you in how you frame it in your mindâs eye? Is a thought physical? Explain the essence of a thought?
No, I am not a physicalist. Iâm only a believer in change. In fact, thoughts are an excellent example of something non-physical (though they do have physical representations in the brain). What is the essence of a thought? Not sure about that one. I think the essence of concepts are just thatâessencesâthatâs what they project as. The essence of knowledge or belief is truth. The essence of remembering is the past. The essence of mental visualizations or fantasy is the mind itself (or the âunrealâ as I sometimes call it). â These are all examples of âthinkingâ.
Now, there may be no way to resolve this disagreement. If you insist that there is a constant, unchanging soul and I insist that everything changes and we just project identities on things in a recurring fashion, and if we both take these as starting points, then how are either of us going to convince the other?
Truths are not objects. They donât exist like rocks or trees or things like that. Truths are properties of propositions or statements. When I say âAll circles are round,â â that statement is true. It will always be true. But there is nothing to persist after Iâve made the statement. Itâs one of those recurring things. Every time the statement recurs, itâs true. Itâs just difficult to imagine the truth value of the statement when itâs not being made. The very attempt to imagine it requires that you bring the statement to mind, and you see that itâs true every time. It gives the impression that the statement, with its truth value, endures even when we are not thinking about it.
Now you are making a distinction between a true statement and a truth, why? I mean, you are still not answering my question. Iâm talking about the totality of whatâs behind the Wizard of Ozâs curtain, not how to id a circle.
Other than a property of statements, Iâm not sure what a âtruthâ is. Like I said, I donât believe truth is an object, itâs not something floating around out there. I suppose what youâre talking about is what some people call âthe Truthââas in, âI want to know the Truth.â â But what is that? What is âthe Truthâ in general? Is it the whole body of specific truths? Is it the state of reality summed up in one principle? Is it just the state of reality itself? What?
Maybe we can do this: you seem to be partial to âessencesââthe being of things that defines them as what they are, a sort of âsoulâ of thingsâIâm not against essences at allâI believe in them tooâbut I think they project from usâwe give things their essencesâthey project from thought, from concepts. For me, this sort of puts them in a timeless state. If the essence of something is what defines it as the thing it is, then essences are definitions, the âis-nessâ of a thing. Definitions are timeless. If we define a square as a polygon with four equal sides and four right angles, then that holds for all squares for all timeâit doesnât change as a function of time. â This is where you get your constant. The only difference for me is that I think of such definitions as timelessânot time-bound and unchanging throughout timeâbut literally outside time (or rather, atemporal). For me, the word âconstantâ or âunchangingâ makes little sense in this contextâconstancy and change only makes sense within time, a medium in which things can be constant or changing. I donât think of things outside this context as âconstantâ. â And that is probably where our communication breaks down.