In response to Question 165, you state that
" Consciousness is the reality of our experience, that which truly perceives it. If there is only one reality, consiousness must also be the substance of everything“.
Can you please explain the logic here more clearly? Why can’t consciousness experience something that is “physical matter”?
I can think of two ways in which we may arrive at that conclusion:
All we experience is not the “physical matter” itself, but the image/sound/vibration of the external matter as it shows up in our consciousness. However this by itself does not mean consciouness is the substance of all physical matter OR that there can be no physical matter in the universe?
If you make the statement based on discoveries in quantum physics that all “physical” matter is made largely of space - doesn that not involve a concept or belief that is not our direct experience?
You fail to see the logic of my argument because you have a different concept/belief of consciousness that implicitly sees it as limited and personal. I define it differently, as the Reality, the centrality of our human experience. Our human experience is mind, made of thoughts, feelings and sense perceptions of the external objects. The Reality of our experience is that which truly, really perceives it, whatever that is.
Now, I make one more logical statement before reaching the conclusion that consciousness is the reality, the substance of everything, namely that there is only one reality. I cannot prove that to you, anymore than I can prove to you that there is consciousness. However, if you accept these two statements:
A. There is consciousness, which is the reality of our experience, that which truly perceives it.
B. There is only one reality
Then the conclusion
If you don’t accept C, then you must reject either A or B as false.
Having clarified this point, let’s review your remarks.
I don’t make this statement based on Physics, but on my direct experience. Whenever I use Quantum Mechanics, it is not to prove anything about consciousness and matter, but rather to “deconstruct” the ordinary and largely common view we have of reality, a materialist view we could call atomistic realism, by showing that this view is a mere belief which not only has no experiential basis, but which is also at odds with Q.M.