Gee wrote:Like consciousness is the product of a body? You must do better than this, or I rest my case.
Show me a consciousness without a body? And whilst I'm still not quite sure what you mean by 'consciousness' if you mean self-awareness as in being aware one is aware then I think that limited to very few bodies.
The only consciousness without a body that I can think of would involve the paranormal/supernatural, and you would simply discount it. Consciousness outside of a body has been documented by psychologists and is known as "personal space".
If you do not understand what I mean by 'consciousness' go to the online SEP, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and look it up. Consciousness means awareness. I am talking about the basic simple awareness that is in all life.
If I mean "self-awareness", then I will say, "self-awareness". Please do not ask this again.
"Where" is a damned good question, and I would love to know the answer. If you read "Pure Consciousness?", then you should know that I addressed this issue in that thread, but I will give a brief outline of my thoughts here in this thread.
When I started to study consciousness, I realized that I don't actually know what it is anymore than anyone else, so I could not really examine it. The only thing that I could do is examine how it works, much like how we first examined gravity, or how Freud examined the mind.
I think Freud made up a lot of stuff to save his career, see Jeffrey Masson - Assault on Truth.
I understand Freud's core ideas and realize that most people don't. I also think that Jeffrey is trying to make a name for himself, and that you are missing the point of my above quote. It is not generally a good idea to miss the point and then make a point out of missing the point.
Awareness is something that requires at least two points. There needs to be a point to focus from, and a point to focus on, in order for awareness to exist, or something must be aware of something. Emotion is very much like this in that it must be moving in order to exist. Emotion is reactionary and works between things. Feeling is a lesser form of emotion, but still requires more than one thing in order to exist.
Again, do you mean 'consciousness' or 'conscious'? Anyhoo 'awareness' could exist because we recognise others, because we can make a model of the other in our heads and as such make a model of ourselves, it could also be because of the existence of Language which also needs two.
Recognition is part of awareness, but it is not necessary to awareness. Before my cataract surgery, I could see a lot of things badly, but could not see well enough to recognize them. I still knew that they were there -- I was aware of them.
A blade of grass is conscious, in the simplest form, so it is aware. Do you suppose that a blade of grass can make a model of something, or possess language? The only thing that I know to be true about awareness is that it requires at least two points, which means that it requires matter.
Knowledge, memory, and thought do not require a second point, as they can exist quietly without motion. We can transfer knowledge, memory, and thought to a book, a CD, a DVD, or any other type of storage and preserve them. So they do not require any type of motion or awareness to exist, but a book without a reader has no value; a CD without a listener has no value; a DVD without a watcher has no value. Knowledge/memory/thought have no value without awareness, so they, in and of themselves, are not consciousness.
Why is not memory a major part of what it is to be a consciousness and why is it that memory is exactly an act of motion and that it provides a duality?
Memory can be part of consciousness, it simply is not consciousness on it's own. As to the rest, I have no idea of what you mean. What duality? Please elaborate.
So this was how I first divided consciousness, into the part that required motion to exist and the part that did not require motion to exist. Later, I realized that the second division, knowledge/memory/thought, was internal and private. Another person can not know your thoughts, memories, or knowledge unless you choose to share them. They are completely private.
How is memory different from a thought? How is memory not knowledge? How is knowledge not a thought?
Memory is simply stored thought. Knowledge is simply thought that is believed to be true, rather than just information. They are all variations of the same thing, and they are all internal and private aspects of consciousness.
The first division, awareness/feeling/emotion is not private. It requires that second point to exist, so it works between things, between people. A person, who knows you well, can sense your moods, other people can read your emotions through body language, etc., so this division is not private and is shared, unless you intentionally hide it. It is naturally external to the body.
Why is it not that because the body can express such things without conscious control then they can be seen, not that they are actually external to that body but that that body is external to others?
The contents of two containers can not connect magically. This is reality. Something connects them, and as far as we know, that something is called emotion.
Emotion also works inter and intra specie, as it is the communicator between you and your dog, your cat, your horse, and many other species. You do not require language to communicate inter specie because emotion does this for us. One could say that emotion is the first communication.
I'd have thought that the emotion is internal and its the expression via the body that allows others to read such things. My kids think I'm angry when I'm just concentrating hard.
Emotion feels like it is internal, but emotion always has a source. The source is not internal. From what I have learned thus far, the source of emotion is something else that is alive, or it is beauty or ugliness. Remember that emotion is about negative and positive, about repulsion and attraction, it is in motion and works
between things -- not within them -- although we feel
it within us.
I can not explain your children's inability to interpret your moods correctly.
Then I studied instincts and learned that all of our basic instincts, the ones that keep us alive, work through feeling and emotion. So we would not survive without emotion. Then I started to compare and look for other ways that emotion works externally and found that most of the supernatural works through emotion, and religion and morality are all about emotion. Religion is the glue that binds a society, and it is not difficult for most people to see the God -- consciousness relationship.
Language is a bigger glue.
Yes. Language does a good job of bringing people together, and it does a good job of pissing people off. Not unlike religions.
Of course, science will not take the supernatural or religion seriously, but has to admit that emotion has great power over thought, as it can create or erase our memories, and emotion has great power over mind, as emotion can destroy it, shock, divide it, multiple personality disorder, and bond minds as in the riot mentality. It is not a great stretch to consider that emotion may be influential in creating mind, as there is nothing else that has such influence over mind.
I don't disagree that the endocrine system is a part of what it is to be conscious but not sure if it is in what it is to be a consciousness. We can also change and alter the effects of emotion via reason and thought so not so powerful if we don't wish it.
You think like a biologist. The endocrine system is not necessary. Consider that all life does not have an endocrine system, but all life has some type of hormone in every cell of every body of every specie. As far as we know every specie tested has some form of pheromone that communicates outside of the body. These hormones and pheromones work through feeling and emotion -- inside and outside of the body.
Obviously, you do not understand Freud's teaching. A lot of people who decide to change their emotions end up spending years on a psychologist's couch. (chuckle)
So emotion works externally, is the first communication, works inter and intra species, keeps us alive through instincts, and binds us together. Emotion works through the sub/unconscious aspect of mind and can not be known in the rational aspect of mind, it can only be interpreted -- not known. Poets, artists, and religions all try to interpret emotion, which is why "God" is always related to the people doing the interpretation. They invariably include their own selves into their interpretation, just as artists do.
But it only works externally because it expresses via a body, so not external in the sense of being external to a body.
As far as I know and understand, bodies are always necessary to interpret and acknowledge the emotion. Without a body, I don't see how the emotion can exist, which is one of the problems that I have with Beon Theory. On the other hand, the work is done externally, and sometimes, as in the case of bonds, the work can be done without the benefit of the five senses. So something is going on, and it is going on between us, and through the sub/unconscious aspect of mind. It is an awareness that is activated by emotion.
So I think that emotion is consciousness and that it is simply a speeded up version of awareness. But, of course, science is not going to buy most of the above. Science does admit that bonds do exist, they have no idea of what bonds are, but they are necessary to life. So when talking to science people, I state that bonds connect people, we know this, but consciousness is within people, so is this connection magic? Two separate containers can not magically connect. This is reality. Consciousness is not solely within us.
Agreed, it's a product of us but this does not mean its actually an external thing that can exist without us.