Avatar: I would have to agree with this. Some sensory stimulation seems to seep in, yes, specifically that which the body reacts to through reactions of various sorts, but for the most part much of what is happening around us is utterly being lost to us when we are not consciously aware. Yes, we do have a degree of unconscious connection through conditiong and the like, but conditioning has its genesis in the conscious mind first. Moreover, when we are exposed to a conditioning stimulus, we must first be consciously aware of it in order for us to react on the sub/unconscious level. Yes. We're essentially creating our own little pocket world for that time. We are overriding the stimulus of the real world with this. Although it seems that only with the majority of dreams does the brain not distinguish betwixt its own information and other information, as generally one is aware that one's thoughts come from oneself, for instance.
Agree. Interesting in relation to this is.. I was once very tired after exams and was woken up, but I later didn't remeber that. Later I was told that I was walking about the room and talking some nightmarish, horrible thoughts. It's possible that I was awoken, but my consciousness wasn't, i.e., I was walking unconscious there, and I'd never speak of such things as I said if being conscious. Agree. Not always. That is the problem with psychic illnesses. I've been doing some field work in a psychiatric clinic and there are people who don't distinguish this (hearing voices for example), they are very dangerous and unpredictable if you haven't found out what their voices are telling.
Not necessarily. I breathe, for example. This is, of course 'reasonable', but it is not an activity I control, being under the control of the autonomic nervous system. There are also cases where, afterwards, I cannot account for why I have done something. Surely you've asked yourself, "What the hell did I do that for?"? I disagree on all counts. I have indeed acted whimsically, or chosen to act based upon emotionally-charged context, but I would say that in each of these cases, if I had taken the time to think things through, I could indeed have chosen to act differently. I am free to 'buck against' any choice that I make. This is simply a result of the fact that it was a choice . If one finds that one were not free to 'buck against' an option, there really never was a choice possible. Although I am in full agreement with you that empiricism is the only legitimate foundation for knowledge, the language game fails to help to prove 'other minds'. The problem lies in the premiss: it isn't necessarily true that an 'other mind' is required to learn a language. First: (this is the weaker of my two points) verbal imitation is always present in the learning of a language process. This doesn't require a 'teaching' mind. Natural noises (rushing water, thunder, etc.) as well as noises made by animals could very well be objects of 'learning mimickry'. I'm quite confident that once upon a time, humans simply growled and grunted at each other, much as some animals do. Second: a simple computer program could reasonably be programmed to teach a child a language (again, this brings up the spectre of the AI topic, but that's another topic entirely). Note, the program wouldn't even necessarily have to use a verbal form. A program could conceivably be designed to teach a child a language based upon colour tones alone for example. What about Braille? This is essentially a tactile based language, admittedly one that is taught, but using another language (verbal). We all learn how to identify objects in our environment by touch, but we learn this on our own, with no coaching.
of course one can be all academicy, scientificy, and up ones arse when apporachin this subject. there is nothing wrong with te scientific apporach o' course, but my original question i NOT just apllying to that mode, but also to experiential modes too.........of a combination of both objective and subjective inquiry into this question 'what is consciousness?'.......this would mean psychedelic experience as a mans of insight into consciousness the oter night i was tinking about this qustion. i was thinkin about 'matter'.......actually the question 'whatis matter?' is as difficult if not more so that the original question of tis thread...........obviously there is fundamental connection between 'matter' and 'consciousness' anyway, as i say i was thinkin....andi imagined having taken a pinch of a psychedelic, and have access to a microscope also, and before me is a tree. i look THRU microscop at the tree.....hmmmmmmmmwhat would i see?....well i would see a pattern wouldn't i? and tis pattern would seem incredibly alive...i would be lost in thispattern.....Then i imagined an awareness that was looking at my EYElookin at te tree also trough a microscope. like a double microscope. again it would be a pattern........my arteries in my eyes would b indistingushable from the similar patterns in tree, etc etc these patterns are alive--are conscious. they are not made OF consciousness but ARE consciousness, yet are ALSO matter tere wouldn't be just the looking 'objectively' neither. there would be te emotional FEELINGS regarding te observation. this is usually discarded by 'objectivist' science, but it is very important to keep in mind
ahahhhhh yes. is beautiful, and was very appropriate and well timed water is the most wondrous thing....the living 'metaphor' for what i mean
also the whole question of 'what is consciousness' propbably is more 'desperate' in Wsternized culture which has become alienized from Nature and EVEn from CONSCIOUSNESSin its fullest meaning....Alan Watts: "The dualism of mind and body arose, perhaps, as a clumsy way of describing the power of an intelligent organism to control itsel.It seemed responsible to think of the part controlled as one thing and the part controlling as another. In this way the conscious will was opposed to the involuntary appeties and reason to instinct. In due course we learned to center our identity, our selfhood, in the controlling part--the mind--and increasingly to disown as a mere vehicle the part controlled. It thus escaped our attention that the organism as a whole, largely unconsciouss, was using consciousness and reason to inform and control itself. We thought of our conscious intelligence as descending from a higher realm to take possession of a physical vehicle. We therefore failed to see it as an operation of the same formative process as the structure of nerves, muscles, veins, and bones--a structure so subtly ordered (that is, intelligent) that conscious thought is as yet far from being able to describe it." ((The Joyous Cosmology: Adventures in the Chemistry of Consciousness, by Alan Watts, pages 4-5)))
Avatar: When one is utterly worn out, strange things like this tend to happen, yes. It may be related to the body knowing it is so exhausted, it simply refuses to "wake up" properly and enters almost into a sleep-walking state. Ah! A good point. I wasn't thinking in terms of schizophrenics and the like. It always seemed interesting to me how people can have voices speak to them, though. Has there been any studies done on it that links it, perhaps, to the capacity for the brain to create personalities in dreams and the like? glaucon: The body is certainly acting for its survival and energy needs when breathing, is it not? A proper reason that something is happening. And as to being totally taken back by why I did something like that, whilst I have had that feeling, I do realize that my reasoning process was apparent at the time, just that in hindsight - which is, as they say, 20/20 - it seems silly or embarrassing. The problem with assuming the hypothetical capacity to choose differently is that it is an untestable assertion. The reality is that we do choose one thing and this choice, not existing in a vacuum, but clearly impacted by prior likes, personality traits, et cetera, seems to point towards prior conditioning of one sort or another to be biased towards that choice. The problem is accounting for everything which impacts one. However, the very fact that we can often predict behaviour in other people seems to indicate a far less "free" attitude as we'd expect, for should freedom be more absolute, we should show no true signs of constancy, no? It is reasonable to conclude we did indeed develop a sort of "beastial" language of grunts beforehand, yes. Although the meanings, inflections, et cetera, which would likely be passed by culture, would require other conscious beings to do so, as a language in a specific group has no known genetic foundation. This would become more and more true the more it become a proto-human language, with complex thoughts being expressed. Ah, but does not a computer require programming? And if it was a mock-mind, with some of the aspects of intelligence, could not we conclude that it was, at least in part, a being? Moreover, whilst it is definitely true that we can associate languages with other senses, these too, for mutual intelligibility, or for us to teach to another person, require other minds, no? Braile, for instance, in order to really work, needs to be rooted in a language all ready developed. Water: Yes. I love woodland streams. Duendy: Alive does not necessarily mean conscious. If I cut off a finger, for a while it would be "still alive", but would it have conscious thought?
If there is, then I'm not aware of that, I don't really have an in depth knowledge in psychic illnesses, have a course in diagnosis only.
Not only! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! If the human is stereotypical enough or you know him well it's more or less easy to predict what s(he) will say next. I once freaked out one teenager girl when wrote the exact question she was going to ask me in front of her, and after the question showed her the paper. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Free will is a funny question. I could do something completely irrational, but would the desire to do something irrational, in spite to show that there is free will would not be preconditioned too? Alas it is my thought that we have free will, but only when we are paying attention to what we are doing/thinking. If we are not, then it's more or less logical, automatic steps (taking in mind past experience, etc). But I can freewill to realisticly imagine a snake sliding across my arm and it's not something that I would have logically done, thus that is free will.
Water I'm just responding in a language deundy understands. I'm surprised you haven't noticed that many of his posts use that particular dialect.
so when i am saying consciousness, i am meaning uncnsciousness too. which may sound weird so i will have to try explore what i am meaning by unconsciousness ....Well we knoqw about THE unconsciousness dont we?,,,,,to be simple, for Frued it was a kind of repository for repressed thoughts emotions, alo involving the 'Id' which connected us--according to his theories with te 'primeval swamps' etc....i hope to go into this later, ten we get the renegade Jung who sees 'the unconacious' as a dimension more spiritual and 'Collective'----it is VERY interesting to note that in his first renderings about 'the unconscious' he included animal and plant collectivity, but later just included human collectivity! Alan Watys in his book Psychotherapy East and West reveals the limitations of Freudian and Jungian interpretations of the unconscious......their limitations due to unacknowleddged and...Uncpnscious metaphysical assumptions....but like i said i'll maybe explore this later All i am rtrying to say is that the unconscious involves awareness we usually phase out of the needs fr survival....so forexample, i may be talking with one of you. i notice your body language, your scents, you tone of voice, other events that may be happening.....v ery aware, yet seemingy phase out, and depending how much i allow myself TO be aware of, th rest is Unconscious, yet ISbeing recorded.......as re my feelings that i may not be awareof. maybe i hafv created for myself a persona that is fixed. like a fixed mask i show to the world, and thus become unconscious of other aspects of myself. YE at a level i Am aware of all this, and when at the right occasion, will remember and BE aware of these aspects, etc
Yes, I've noticed you were using his style! But I couldn't tell what motivated you to do so. Then, I thought maybe you were giving hugs to emptiness ....
the 78th funniest thing i've heard. as if only cells would be alive and not the parts which cells are made of. there is no specific line between alive and dead because everything lives. death is the other side of life.
