Is it plausible that humans will one day escape our reality's constraints and exist in a higher dimension?

No.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is detached from reality and living a delusion.

Consciousness may not be derived from the material, let alone the brain, as neurologists may have you blieve.
No one knows where consciousness resides in the human body (if it even resides in it), what consciousness is made of, etc.
So it is possible that the consciousness can persist without the material.

Higher dimensions? nope.
Alternate reality? maybe.

That may be your opinion and I respect that.

Though, my counter to that would be to consider the human brain as the computational unit of the human body (akin to your desktop computer) and that the consciousness inhabiting it is akin to the operating system, that arises from the pathing of bioelectrical current and neurotransmitters through the brain itself.
In that, as it learns, it becomes more conscious and as it becomes more conscious, it learns.

Therefore, without the Higgs field, the brain would not exist and nor would the electrons.

>That may be your opinion and I respect that.
no, learn some metaphysics. Consciousness is something that cannot be measured, located, or derived. For all we know our consciousness is a 4-D version of us existing in a higher plane of reality that is vaguely connected to our 3-D brain.

>Though, my counter to that would be to consider the human brain as the computational unit of the human body (akin to your desktop computer) and that the consciousness inhabiting it is akin to the operating system, that arises from the pathing of bioelectrical current and neurotransmitters through the brain itself.
I see your point. However, one could intrepret it the other way around. The conscoiunsess acts on the brain, and that in turn affect the "computer" that is the brain. The computer-brain concept is a reductionist approach to the brain and mind anyways. As the mind operates in ways that the brain does not. For example: in the occipital lobe there is a section of the cerebrum dedicated to perceiving the shape of an object, and another to perceive the color. However, there is no place anywhere in the brain that put's these two pieces of information together.

Load of shit. Consciousness is purely the ability to model a future thru having extra bits beyond being in and of itself, such as that that a rock has.

Give us any other nexus of concentrated information processing ability with strictures essentially the same as what the brain has and our consciousness could reside there.

Sorry for taking a while to reply, I went to make myself a tea as my energy started to wane.

>Consciousness is something that cannot be measured, located, or derived. For all we know our consciousness is a 4-D version of us existing in a higher plane of reality that is vaguely connected to our 3-D brain.
That's wonderful, but that doesn't mean that I am not entitled to my own opinion, or that your opinion is correct as the concept you have described above is purely that, conceptual, mine has some grounding in the objective (reality) and that is why, after applying Occam's razor I prefer it to the school of metaphysics that you Occam's razor to.

>However, one could intrepret it the other way around.
Precisely, both are unknowns, I just simply prefer mine, it doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong until proven so empirically.

>However, there is no place anywhere in the brain that put's these two pieces of information together.
What about the corpus callosum? Perhaps that bridge between the two differing regions of the brain allows them to operate together.
Considering that autism, HFA and Asperger's mechanism manifests through the corpus callosum, it clearly changes the way that different sections of the brain interact, when comapred to the neurotypical, synesthesia being another example of atypical neurology (aside from autistic neurology) that is manifest within the corpus callosum.

>Postscriptum caveat: please refrain from the use of a condescending lexicon, "learn some metaphysics", as this is opinion based and not everyone subscribes to the same philosophical schools of thought as others. Not to mention, so far we've clearly been on par intellectually, simply offering differing opinions.

>Load of shit.
i will take that as a complement :^)

>Give us any other nexus of concentrated information processing ability with strictures essentially the same as what the brain has and our consciousness could reside there.
no, you are just a materialist who does not want to accept the nihilist conclusions of existence. A pig is no more conscious than a rock, nor is a computer more conscious than a clock. You just want to believe that there is a way to escape the nihilist conclusions of life.

*that you ascribe to
>That moment when your brain puts in utterly the wrong word, but assures you it put in the correct word.

oh.

>the concept you have described above is purely that, conceptual,
True. Most of philosophy is.
>mine has some grounding in the objective (reality) and that is why, after applying Occam's razor
Yes yours does tie to the concept of abstracted computational science. However, that does not necessitate that consciousness be derived from electric current and neuro-chemical interactions. Your theory has ties to measurable reality, but it is not necessarily the whole truth or picture.
> I prefer it to the school of metaphysics that you Occam's razor to.
>that you Occam's razor to.
what did you mean by this?
> I just simply prefer mine, it doesn't mean either of us are right or wrong until proven so empirically.
empirical proof can only tie to the physical, if consciousness in a metaphysical/non-physical derivative of physical interactions, then consciousness itself cannot be measured. We cannot prove the existence of other dimensions of space nor can we prove the existence of alternate realities that exist outside our own, the best we can do is hypothesize. Empiricism cannot measure what is not physical.
>What about the corpus callosum?
scientists have dissected the corpus callosum before so that neither side of the brain can communicate with the other. People could still perceive both object shape and colour simultaneously. What's more, the left and right brain could act independent of each other, yet the individual was only aware of what their left brain was doing.
>Postscriptum caveat: please refrain from the use of a condescending lexicon, "learn some metaphysics", as this is opinion based and not everyone subscribes to the same philosophical schools of thought as others. Not to mention, so far we've clearly been on par intellectually, simply offering differing opinions.
Very well.

>True. Most of philosophy is.
Conceded.
>Yes yours does tie to the concept of abstracted computational science. However, that does not necessitate that consciousness be derived from electric current and neuro-chemical interactions. Your theory has ties to measurable reality, but it is not necessarily the whole truth or picture.
Conceded.
>what did you mean by this?
>Empiricism cannot measure what is not physical.
Very true, though that would in itself be subjective (in relation to this debate) as per my assertion it would be physics, whereas yours differs.
>corpus callosum
Conceded. Also, that's very interesting, you really can learn new things on Veeky Forums.
>Very well
Well, I'd call this a draw, wouldn't you?

If a rock had a bit to spare it could project a future - but it doesn't, and so only exists in the ever present now.

Does this mean consciousness is holy or some such in some fashion? No, but it is definitelt different to pure Being.

We can catch some of the cruder threads of causality and imagine being in the future - that's all consciousness is, but we are 'special' insofar as we have it.

Nor is anthropocentrically exclusive, mosquitoes also exist on that conscious spectrum - if further down it than we are.

>Well, I'd call this a draw, wouldn't you?
i suppose it is a draw.
Best we can do is believe what we think. Best way to test would be to see if there is a region of the brain that causes death when shut-down (but which does not regulate the heart and lungs). If brain death is caused by a specific point in the brain then we know consciousness is tied to brain matter and may very well be entirely physical, but if not then we know consciousness is not due to the brain.

We will find out some-day, until then we are at a draw.

Thanks for the discussion user.

>consciousness spectrum
never though about it that way. perhaps consciousness is on a spectrum like my autism?
Consciousness may be holy, or it may not be. There is no definite proof for or against the existence of a God or gods, same for an afterlife and consciousness.

>i suppose it is a draw.
Perfect, a rare thing on Veeky Forums too.
>Best we can do is believe what we think.
I agree, it is the same reason why I am an agnostic until I have empirical proof either way (although there is a very strong likelihood that god or gods are nothing more than concepts).
>Best way to test would be to see if there is a region of the brain that causes death when shut-down (but which does not regulate the heart and lungs). If brain death is caused by a specific point in the brain then we know consciousness is tied to brain matter and may very well be entirely physical, but if not then we know consciousness is not due to the brain.
That would certainly be an interesting experiment and would finally shed some light on what or what-not consciousness is.
Though, I imagine that it wouldn't happen unless we had a drastic shift in the 'ethical zeitgeist'.
>We will find out some-day, until then we are at a draw.
Until that day, user, until that day.
>Thanks for the discussion user.
Likewise, enjoy the rest of your day, or night.

The fact that I was so deep into a lucid dream last night gives me hope that theres other ways to conciously create a reality as an observer.

I experienced a whole day in a lucid dream. Using my occultish esoteric knowledge and meditation techniques I was able to not wake myself up or lose the full lucidness at points where the dream went dark.

I remember losing lucidity and then just sitting in a meditation position, there was just a small light around my being and darkness surrounding that. I then calmed myself and reminded myself to clear my mind instead of trying to create a dream too hard and the light surrounding me started pushing the darkness around me away in pulses and i ended up in another world.

Its amazing, and in this state of conciousness everything feels more real. Your brain reacts as if it was real and responds accordingly. I woke up with a huge load all over my leg.

Theres gotta be a way to prolong this. Maybe there is and normies arent aware of it. Maybe secret socities practice this.

I always thought consciousness was just neurons that we just haven't found yet. The answer I wrote makes the most intuitive sense, however I'm willing to hear other answers.

then please read the thread user. It's not going anywhere.

Several times in my life i have had precognitive dreams (dreams of the future in that day or a day to come).
I have also had dreams where everything seemed exactly in reality, but whenever i stoody up in the dream, i could still feel the bed against me, which helped me know i was not yet awake. Another thing was that gravity was always ever-so-slightly off from the usual, and light did not behave as it should.