OK, rationally thinking... The question would be "What are You?" Once we answer that then based on What we can say Who... Again, based on my philosophy... there's 2 sides. 1 the subjectivity and the other... objectivity of of what we are... Subjectively, like GG says. It's what we are. The physical, mental, and spiritual self put together is what we are. The thin line we are in between Life and Death, Existing and Non-Existing is What we are. Existantial Truth of Life and Existing is the What of "Now". There can never be an "Absolute Truth" because of this fact, though the Existantial "Fact" is "Absolute". Now... Who are you... Hrmm... Objectively, what a person does is what makes who that person is. The law of cause and effect cause the wheel of life to spin. Who we are is the resultant of the past action. Like Hume but in a larger scale. We are constantly in a reactionary basis of decisions. We base the choices based on experience that was lead from other experiences and so forth. Regardless of experience, we are a resultant of our parents having us. Keep on going down time... it's never ending but it stays with us in some connection. We are not the brain. We are the resultant of the past.
What are we ? O.K. Let me try to confuse you all a bit. Imagine you go to sleep tonight and dream that you are a butterfly. The next morning you wake up and my question is : Are you a man who dreamed he was a butterfly OR are you a butterfly who dreamed that he was a man who dreamed he was a butterfly ? How can we prove we are a man (dreaming about being a butterfly) and not the second proposition ? freealways
It's funny isn't it? I mean that you posses the most clarity that a human being can at this time in our evolution and yet you still can't figure out a silly game like trading... I mean here you are with all that clarity and yet you are still one of the blind mice when it comes to getting this cheese... I mean you are able to quickly figure out all the mysteries of the universe by using your rational intellect (without even having the slightest bit of knowledge of the scientific end or mystical end) and yet you can't figure out some buying and selling... GG do you think there is a correlation between the way you approach the great questions of human kind and the universe and the way you approach the game of trading? Anyway don't bother responding because you are now going back on my ignore list where you should have stayed... good luck with everything man and try to apply some of that 'clarity' you posses to this silly game before you go bust...
Asshole (I don't like to be a jerk, but sometimes it's called for.), Go ahead and put me on fuckin' ignore. It must really bother you that I, "without even having the slightest bit of knowledge of the scientific end", and you, being as wise as you are, still can't argue a subject better than I can. Now that that's out of the way, your original question is an interesting one: I actually do think there could be a correlation between the way I think and the fact that I don't make money trading. I thought about this today actually, before you even made this post. I will be the first to admit that a lot of my logic is very rigid. I like things to be true or false, step by step. Maybe a trader must not think that way to be successful. Since you noticed that this could very well be an issue, you tell me, what is it about my thinking that gives me trouble trading? I won't be a jerk and tell you not to respond; it's your choice. I have no one on my ignore list.
GG, just so you know, it's a fact that every nerve cell in the brain is completely replaced every 3 days. The brain is replaced 10,000 on average human life span. Your theory that you are the brain contradicts the top brain neuro scientiests discoveries.. Eccler said something like it is evident that the person is not the brain, that instead he uses the brain like a computer. Another one said, the person is in the drivers seat, and the brain is the controls to the car. No doubt, the brain is a key component to the functioning of the body. I give you 1 point for that. Without a functioning brain it could be hard to operate the body.
At the end of the volume is what amounts to a transcript of one of their daily discussions. Eccles has this to say: (Ref. 10) So I am constrained to believe that there is what we might call a supernatural origin of my unique self-conscious mind or my unique self-hood or soul; and that gives rise of course to a whole new set of problems. How does my soul come to be in liaison with my brain that has an evolutionary origin? By this idea of a supernatural creation (of the soul) I escape from the incredible improbability that the uniqueness of my own self is genetically determined. There is no problem about the genetic uniqueness of my brain. It is the uniqueness of the experienced self that requires this hypothesis of an individual origin of the self or soul, which is then associated with a brain that thus becomes my brain [emphasis mine]. That is how the self comes to act as a self-conscious mind, working with the brain in all the ways that we have been discussing, receiving (from it) and giving (to it), and doing a marvelous integrating and driving and controlling job on the neural machinery of the brain.