Definition of Consciousness

[Navigator]

How can the UNconscious be part of consciousness ?

I said that the term carried with it a baggage of woo. I prefer the term "unconscious", which is more neutral.

Unconscious? How about 'non conscious', since unconscious swings more to the idea that you are in a state of not being aware of anything - like when having major surgery?

How can the UNconscious be part of consciousness ?

That is why I am asking if you can accept 'non conscious'.

Being non conscious of an aspect of the self.

 

[dlorde]

If you are suggesting subconsciousness is an aspect of, in this case, the central nervous system, then I gather you would not consider such to be 'woo'?

That wasn't remotely what I suggested, although I'm happy to accept the 'subconscious' as a label for brain activity we are not consciously aware of.

To answer then...I am using the expression:


There is certainly something which is beyond the normal senses of conscious awareness (that sense of 'self') which most definitely [is] intimately connected with the 'self' and can be interacted with.

In the same way as you and I could interact. Intelligently, purposefully, provocatively, in the attitude of mutual respect with the intention of wanting to get to know one another more intimately.

I see that I left the word [is] out of the original statement, which might have contributed to any confusion.

And I was asking you to be more specific about that 'something', because the description you gave is vague enough that the autonomic nervous system would match it, and I presume you don't mean that - or do you? what do you mean?

Are you suggesting you have the sensation that there's some 'intelligent, purposeful, provocative' agency you can silently commune with, that has no apparent external presence? another intelligent entity in your mind?

 

[Anders Lindman]

Maybe subconscious activities need consciousness to be activated at the same time. And unconscious means the total absence of consciousness.

Many people have for example sometimes been driving a car to work and when arriving at the destination their conscious mind has been occupied by daydreaming and they don't remember anything of how they actually got there. Their subconscious did all the driving.

 

[Iamme]

Very droll...

Do you realise the naivety of many of those questions - Yes or No?

You`ve GOT to be kidding me. Is this a ploy to get off the hook from answering questions so fellow skeptics dont attack your beliefs?

 

[Navigator]

Maybe subconscious activities need consciousness to be activated at the same time. And unconscious means the total absence of consciousness.

Many people have for example sometimes been driving a car to work and when arriving at the destination their conscious mind has been occupied by daydreaming and they don't remember anything of how they actually got there. Their subconscious did all the driving.

Yes. There are versions of 'consciousness' and you have described one such state.
Language being what it is, it is important to at least to get on some kind of same page in order to go forward in discussion, otherwise things get confusing.

I would class what you have said here as something of an aspect of subconsciousness. Others might differ, but as long as you and I could agree, we could then discuss that, using that term and know that this is what we are referring to.

 

[Navigator]

That wasn't remotely what I suggested, although I'm happy to accept the 'subconscious' as a label for brain activity we are not consciously aware of.

Well that is helpful.

Are you suggesting you have the sensation that there's some 'intelligent, purposeful, provocative' agency you can silently commune with, that has no apparent external presence? another intelligent entity in your mind?

Almost. Indeed upon first contact (or the initial stages of that contact) it very much appears to be 'another intelligent entity' - but the further one investigates the more apparent it becomes that it is actually an aspect of your self which you are not even aware of and can live your whole life not being aware of.

Now I have no particular term for this aspect which might be the most accurate to use when speaking to others about it so I use the term 'subconscious' because it denotes something which is not happening outside of the self, is intelligent and able to be communicated with and has much to offer in the way of personal growth and better understanding of who and what one is.

 

[dlorde]

You`ve GOT to be kidding me. Is this a ploy to get off the hook from answering questions so fellow skeptics dont attack your beliefs?

No. I used a loaded yes/no question to try and point out that many of the questions on your list are not so simple that a yes/no answer is appropriate - especially when the terms used are ambiguous (e.g. what, precisely, do you mean by 'consciousness' in each context?). It's a form of the false dichotomy fallacy.

 

[dlorde]

Are you suggesting you have the sensation that there's some 'intelligent, purposeful, provocative' agency you can silently commune with, that has no apparent external presence? another intelligent entity in your mind?

Almost. Indeed upon first contact (or the initial stages of that contact) it very much appears to be 'another intelligent entity' - but the further one investigates the more apparent it becomes that it is actually an aspect of your self which you are not even aware of and can live your whole life not being aware of.

Ah OK. This seems reasonable. Current models suggest that conscious awareness is a more-or-less integrated representation of the summarised outputs of a number of processes, both competing and collaborating, processed by a narrative generator to provide a plausible narrative. Evolution being what it is, this system is 'good enough', but is is fairly leaky - there is plenty of crosstalk between the different functions or components, and sometimes conscious awareness has more access to the activities of the underlying processes than usual.

You could call it the subconscious or unconscious, but it seems to me that it is the bulk of what makes us 'us'; conscious awareness is 'just' a filtered summary.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Yes. There are versions of 'consciousness' and you have described one such state.
Language being what it is, it is important to at least to get on some kind of same page in order to go forward in discussion, otherwise things get confusing.

I would class what you have said here as something of an aspect of subconsciousness. Others might differ, but as long as you and I could agree, we could then discuss that, using that term and know that this is what we are referring to.

Ok, technically subconsciousness is maybe a correct term, but it sounds like a form of consciousness, which is wrong according to my definition. So I would call it subconscious activities.

 

[Belz...]

Unconscious? How about 'non conscious', since unconscious swings more to the idea that you are in a state of not being aware of anything - like when having major surgery?



That is why I am asking if you can accept 'non conscious'.

Being non conscious of an aspect of the self.

That makes no sense whatsoever. "Unconscious" MEANS "non conscious". It's the same thing. "Sub" means "under", which is misleading.

 

[Iamme]

dlorde, per your post #187, when i kept using the word consciousness in my 15 questions above, on this same page...simply the dictionary definition regarding an awareness of self. I`m not sure what there is about those questions that you had to ask.

 

[dlorde]

dlorde, per your post #187, when i kept using the word consciousness in my 15 questions above, on this same page...simply the dictionary definition regarding an awareness of self. I`m not sure what there is about those questions that you had to ask.

For example, in what sense might the universe have a self to be aware of?

If you find those questions simple and unambiguous, why not give us your answers?

 

[Navigator]

That makes no sense whatsoever. "Unconscious" MEANS "non conscious". It's the same thing. "Sub" means "under", which is misleading.

Well I am not conscious of what you were doing when I wrote this post, but I am conscious while I write this.

 

[Navigator]

Ah OK. This seems reasonable. Current models suggest that conscious awareness is a more-or-less integrated representation of the summarised outputs of a number of processes, both competing and collaborating, processed by a narrative generator to provide a plausible narrative. Evolution being what it is, this system is 'good enough', but is is fairly leaky - there is plenty of crosstalk between the different functions or components, and sometimes conscious awareness has more access to the activities of the underlying processes than usual.

You could call it the subconscious or unconscious, but it seems to me that it is the bulk of what makes us 'us'; conscious awareness is 'just' a filtered summary.

I think that if something of yourself which can actually be communed with then it is best allowed to speak for itself as to what it is.

If the dominant part of the self is the 'filter' aspect and largely left to its own devices, to make the decisions, do whatever it chooses while ignorant of the other aspect, and anything about the nature of the other aspect, essentially the other aspect does not exist in relation to the dominant aspect experiencing life and in control of the 'hands on' even that it actually does exist.

As mentioned, things do 'leak through' and speaking from my own experience, engaging with the other aspect is a bit like gradually removing the obstacle which prevents the more steady flow, like a dam which has its gate closed...leaks happen, but when the gate is lifted the flow increases.

The deeper aspect of the self may be unknown to the personal awareness of the individual, but everything that you experience is known to that part of your self you are largely or completely unaware of.

 

[dlorde]

If the dominant part of the self is the 'filter' aspect and largely left to its own devices, to make the decisions, do whatever it chooses while ignorant of the other aspect, and anything about the nature of the other aspect, essentially the other aspect does not exist in relation to the dominant aspect experiencing life and in control of the 'hands on' even that it actually does exist.

I think it's a mistake to think conscious awareness is dominant, or left to its own devices. It provides the system with a reflective awareness of its activities. The real 'power behind the throne' is usually below conscious awareness - we generally don't notice it unless it fails to provide the right word at the right time, or provides the wrong phrase, or fails to supply the memory of what the hell we went upstairs for in the first place. We are aware of it more by its failings than by it's successes, which, as the representative or spokesperson, consciousness arrogates to itself. I would suggest conscious awareness is more the puppet than the master; along for the ride, with the illusion of control.

But we should be wary of treating these apparent functional elements as entirely separate, because they are all parts of the same system; consciousness has evolved to enhance and extend the functionality of the underlying system.

 

[Belz...]

Well I am not conscious of what you were doing when I wrote this post, but I am conscious while I write this.

And ? What's your point ?

 

[tsig]

People really have a hard time understand the simple fact that you are your brain.

People think of their brain as this thinking, processing machine that does the work of your mind, but tend to think of themselves, their core, the "soul," their essence or whatever is something separate, something apart from their mind.

There is zero evidence to support this.

Just because there is zero evidence to support it and all evidence we have proves the opposite, science doesn't know everything so my woo is true.

 

[tsig]

...Continuing this post:

Person B: The dead bodies are evidence because they are what the persons were.

Person C: Please explain.

B: People have a hard time understanding the simple fact that we are the brain. The brain dies so the person dies. It is really that simple.

C: How much do we actually know about the brain? I mean, do we know everything there is to know about it?

B: No but we know more than we ever did and certainly enough to understand that we are it.

C: You are speaking about consciousness?

B: Yes. Consciousness is a property of the brain.

C: It is owned by the brain?

B: No. It is a tool of the brain. A creation of the brain.

C: It is a creator?

B: Yes.

C: Before it created consciousness, how was it able to create?

B: What do you mean?

C: I mean, before something can create something, doesn't it need to have an idea of what it wants to create and a reason for wanting to create it?

B: Yes, but this happened very gradually over a long long period of time.

C: So the brain at some point in this process developed consciousness by degree?

B: Yes.

C: Where did it get the idea to do this thing?

B: Like I said, it was gradual. It wasn't so much an idea but a natural necessity which came about gradually.

C: Like waking up from sleep?

B: Something like that, yes. The necessity came about because of the situation. Life on earth is a matter of survival so your learn fast or you die.

C: But you said it was a gradual thing.

B: Yes but in relation to the age of the universe, it was nonetheless fast.

C: This would suppose that there had to be a time and place on the planet where threat of survival was not such a problem.

B: No. Survival is that which prompted the development of self awareness.

C: How do you know it wasn't the other way around? That self awareness prompted the realization that survival was necessary?

B: Well most likely it was aspects of both.

C: Okay so when you say 'you are your brain' you are saying that the 'you' part is the brain understanding itself as consciousness - being self aware. You are not saying that you literally are the brain.

B: No I am saying you are literally the brain...or rather the consciousness which the brain developed. That is why when your brain dies, you are dead and there is nothing else that you are going to experience.
I am saying that because consciousness is simply a development of the brain which gives it the illusion of being self aware, when it dies, that self awareness also dies. It is quite simple.

C: I can understand why you would think it so. However, why do you say it is an illusion? Are you saying that the universe is an illusion, that the whole experience of your life is an illusion?

B: It is an illusion because you die. You are the illusion. The universe is not an illusion. It is real. What is the illusion is that you think you are real.

C: How can something exist in a real thing and not be real itself?

B: The thing which thinks it is real is simply a creation of the brain, so that the body can do things in the real world, which it cannot do if it didn't have the illusion it was real.

C: So consciousness and the impression that you are a real individual having a real experience are illusions?

B: Yes because the brain created it, but it is not a 'thing'. Consciousness is not a thing. It is an illusion created by the brain in order to function in reality.
It is not really real. It is just something the brain created.

C: Did the brain create this non thing in order to make its experience real?

B: No. The experience is real. The brain developed consciousness in order to work within the reality and survive long enough to do things with its body.

C: So when you say 'you are the brain' you are saying really that you are that which the brain developed in order to be able to function within the body and do things with the reality it is within, but that consciousness is not real, and therefore you are not real. You are really the brain, which is real?

B: Yes. People think of their brain as this thinking, processing machine that does the work of consciousness, and think of themselves, as that - as the core, or the "soul," the essence or whatever is something separate, something apart from their brain, and that they will survive the death of their brain. But consciousness is really an illusion of the brain.

C: How can you be sure either way? I mean. What evidence is there to support this beyond mere belief supporting the idea?


...to be continued...

A dialog with oneself.

 

[Aepervius]

Some good author (in my eyes) said "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away".

I think I have an analogous for consciousness after a week end of libation.

"consciousness is what's left once the alcohol evaporate".

 

[Aepervius]

A dialog with oneself.

I call those "monologue".