What is there to face up to, when the answer is to be had within consciousness itself? Certainly there would be no means by which to comtemplate any of this if we weren't conscious were we? So why do we attempt to look outside of the fact that we're conscious to find the answer? If consciousness tells us everything about the world we know (which it does), why don't we just learn to listen to ourselves?
Facing Up to the Problems of Consciousness?
- Thread starter Iacchus
- Start date
-
- Tags
- consciousness problems
Matteo Martini
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2004
- Messages
- 4,561
Iacchus,
I find it difficult to understand what you have written ..
Maybe you are saying that you can not " understand " or " see " your consciousness because you can not be conscious of the fact that you are " conscious ", or something like that ??
I admit that I did not understand very well what you have written ..
I find it difficult to understand what you have written ..
Maybe you are saying that you can not " understand " or " see " your consciousness because you can not be conscious of the fact that you are " conscious ", or something like that ??
I admit that I did not understand very well what you have written ..
No, I'm suggesting that the key to understanding consciousness is inherent with the experience of consciousness itself. In other words consciousness gives rise to our experience, and our experience tells us what we know. Therefore, the answer to who we are and where we came from must be realized within this conscious entity called, "self."Matteo Martini said:
Go ahead, take Science's word for it if you want, but I prefer not to. How so? My mind is transcendent -- in other words independent of -- the reality it perceives. Ultimately Science still has to answer to the mind which perceives it.c4ts said:
Oh, and that's Iacchus with a capital "I" by the way.
Iacchus said:Go ahead, take Science's word for it if you want, but I prefer not to. How so? My mind is transcendent -- in other words independent of -- the reality it perceives. Ultimately Science still has to answer to the mind which perceives it.
Oh, and that's Iacchus with a capital "I" by the way.
Whoever said anything about science?
LOL...the "problems of consciousness" are the problems inherent in the assumptions of dualism. Iacchus ignores these, and advocates a return to introspection as a better way of understanding? Sorry, Iacchus, it has been tried, and has been found wanting. You have been told that in previous threads here; your memory must be pretty bad.
Matteo Martini
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2004
- Messages
- 4,561
I would not say so, your mind is very much affected by the reality it perceives, even if your mind is not and even is not generated by the reality it perceives.
If you see a tiger running agains you, your mind will be very much affected by this piece of " reality " even after this unpleasant experience is over ( if you are still alive, of course
)elle_inquisitor
Student
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2004
- Messages
- 49
I am just curious, but is this thread not just a rehashing of Descartes "I Think Therefore I Am"?
elle_inquisitor
Student
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2004
- Messages
- 49
Thanks for clarifying that for me. So, in reality, if my mind transcends the reality it perceives everything is illusory?
Iacchus said:The same here. And yet how would you know anything without a mind ... which, is tied to the physicality of the world through the brain.
Or, perhaps you just haven't thought it through.
Or perhaps you are lazy, because you skip steps and expect others to skip them as you did.
You say your thoughts come from God. How do you know this? How do you know God is anything at all?
All I'm saying is if you want to get to the source of understanding who we are, then it doesn't exist outside of "the mind," period. If you wish to insist that this is merely introspection, that's your prerogative, however, you must also conclude that this is the only means Science has at its disposal as well.Mercutio said:
No, Iacchus, I need not conclude that.Iacchus said:
"All [you are] saying is"...an incoherent mixture of half-baked ideas. Today, it appears that you are a solipsist. Yesterday, you were a dualist. You are consistent only in your ignorance of the views you claim to hold.
It is not just me that calls what you are asking us to do "introspection", Iacchus. It is introspection by the definition of the word. So to suggest that it is my prerogative is ... irrelevant. But that is your prerogative.
If you insist, however, I don't deny that an external reality exists, just that the only means we have of determining it exists is through what we perceive. So take your pick, be it materialism, solipsism, dualism, whatever, it's wholly contingent upon what we believe.Mercutio said:
While I figure that since the Universe is so kind to reveal itself to us on a personal level, through our minds, then it shouldn't have that much more trouble revealing why we are here ... if we learn how to "tune is" that is.