Consciousness, subjectivity and self

Re: Re: Whats the "mind" ?

I'm afraid I dont see why it is illogical for consciousness to exist within the brain. In fact I believe scientists have even pin-pointed the area of the brain where it resides.

- Sivakami.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sivakami, "consciousness" of the external world is within the brain of course. Naturally science can show what parts of the brain relate to observation of the world, that's just the brain's "awareness" of sense data, which is more accurately called processing of sense data. Science also may be able to associate an area of the brain with abstract thoughts of the concept of self, but that's again all simply the brain processing data which we deduce to be connected to an idea of self. We can't simply reach into the brain and grab an idea or thought, we can only grab neurons and the quarks they're made of... neuroscience simply shows all the causes of thought that reside in the brain and never touches the thoughts themselves which are the effect of those causes. In fact, the way in which they do these experiments shows perfectly how they're looking for causes rather than effects. The experiments involve asking people to report their mental sensations so that the scientists can attempt to match up the reported mental sensation with a physical pattern in the brain. If the physical sensations were themselves mental sensations (rather than just causes), the scientists would just look into the brain and see "ah, this is a thought of x" without having ever involved asking the person what they're experiencing. If the experience of the thought were in the brain itself, then the experience would be objectively observable without having to go through the trouble of matching up subjective reports people make of their mental state with the observed brain pattern. In other words, when science matches up brain state causes with experienced effects, they're perfectly demonstrating that the two are different... the brain state is the cause, the sensation is the effect.

Anyway, that's the mind (thought/experience) vs. brain, now let's get back to the consciousness I was talking about before which lies within neither the brain nor the thoughts but which of course is very much related.

What I'm talking about when I say consciousness is conscious awareness of thought itself. If thought is the experience, then consciousness is the experiencer. We observe/experience thought, and where there's something being observed or experienced it logically follows that there's a perspective doing the observing or experiencing. Logically, wherever there is observation there is also a perspective from which the observation is taking place, and that perspective cannot possibly reside within a part of the thing it's observing since it couldn't observe it if it weren't outside it. (To have a consciousness within the mind or brain would be like trying to take a picture of your own camera with that same camera.)

Just as an analogy, a single eyeball floating in space would never observe that there's an eyeball there. The eye would look in every direction and only see space around it but never itself. Everything that can be observed in the scene has been observed, without the eyeball ever seeing an eyeball... so do you conclude that there is no eye? No, the eye logically has to be there, even though you will never be able to see it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The oneness of being

Our great and wonderous anatomy has the quality of oneness;
the philosophic debate.....consciousness of being.....this is the
realization of the existentialist and many believe the beginning
of a great convergence with eastern philosophy and so-called "higher consciousness"....which has many aspects. Somehow the debate is superceded by quantum field theory and science reenters with its abstractions......yet in proposing a multi-dimensional universe - it has not contradicted the impetus of the philosophic dialogue. Philosophy's probem became the new science of psychology and the brain's importance in human behavior was established. Material reality and Spiritual Reality have to correspond.....this is tautologic; that is why many today have returned to the rationalist arguement of conscience and the responsibility for one's actions. Heart, Mind and Strength; this somehow determines the health of the brain.
Consciousness and Mind have to be directly related to one another......the brain containing the information to realize both.
The greater issue of life, birth, death, infinity quickened through
sharing thoughts, insights, information of this great passage.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

well i should have posted my riddle in this section because it pertains to this discussion. how are any of your thoughts on the soul (or self awareness). does it mature along with your body or is it at a constant form of thought or whatever one may call it? i think i was hearing that it is of a constant form. is this what was beeing said?

 

Either way, I'm home free. I'm not really responsible for my dispositions because they are purely determined by genetics and enviorment. As well, if it's my soul, than God simply didn't do a good enough job.

 

yeah i tend to think that all u learn and know is purely do to your physical state and that your soul is a constant variable forever alive even after the physical body dies. i just am try to determine, which i most likely will never, whether or not the soul is developed with your body from day one, or was your soul created before your body.

 

The soul has a legal aspect

In the judeo-christian ethic; the soul is protected until the age of consent (when a person begins to make decisions for themselves). This distinguishes between innocence and guilt.....the implication being that self-awareness and the presence of responsiblity are acquired through experience (the long youth and long life of the human being) of "growing up". In recent times the law has begun to require this responsibility at an increasingly younger age......this is an implication of a corrupt society....where children have to be held accountable for grievious crimes which they commit by "imitating" others. The bible teaches that the soul of the innocent child does not suffer judgement whereas the grown up is charged with responsibility. This is why so-called rites of passage are part of every civilization.

 

ahhhh but!!! what if u, at say age 58, get hit by a car and u suffer from a massive head injury which causes u to loose all of you memmories AND your mind again must relearn everything. basicaly your are at this point a child again with the same thoughts u had from when u were a year old. would u be candidate again for the protective soul period?

 

integral ...

Re. "The bible teaches that the soul of the innocent child does not suffer
judgement whereas the grown up is charged with responsibility. This is
why so-called rites of passage are part of every civilization.

And I thought it had to do with proving the individual was brave enough
to be a warrior, with the carrot being that they could then mate.

Foolish me.

Take care

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

i wonder why such things, as my above post says, are not addressed in the bible. maybe its because at the time it was written, man did not know that such things could possibly happen and so they dont state anything to the contrary. but then again im sure anyone at any day and age could slam there head into a brick wall and get that sort of amnesia heh. but still i wonder why it is not addressed.

 

ssiva where do they say our self awarness resides? would be another cool thing for me to know

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!