From: David Zentgraf (deceze@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Sep 11 2005 - 04:29:39 BST
Hi Platt,
> By the same token, it's hard for me to imagine how a bunch of
> insensate
> neurons buzzing around inside my head manage to create consciousness.
> That's a theory I can't grasp, whereas the brain as regulator of
> exterior
> consciousness I can grasp even if a bit strange.
I'd like to hear how you (and others?) came to believe in
consciousness as being external. As for me, if I'm in the "right
mood" I am able to sort of "take a step back" and watch my own body/
mind at work. Which isn't to say that I am watching myself from
outside myself, I am just aware of more things going on. I not only
"see" the world in front of me, I am aware that the images are coming
in through my glasses, then through my eyes, then that I recognise
these images and that I respond to them. And the same with other
senses. So I am aware of the process of awareness in more detail
than usually.
It's hard to explain, as it's something that would need to be
experienced, but in these moments I feel very aware that my
consciousness is working without my active intervention and that it's
just inside my head. Think of it as standing in the middle of a large
room, and where before you only had a flashlight and could only see a
small part of the room at a time, suddenly somebody turned on the
lights and you can see the whole room at once.
That's part of what I base my beliefs and theories on, personal
experience (dare I say enlightenment? no, I don't). Have you had
something similar, or are you mainly basing your opinions on other
people's quotes?
Chrs,
Dav
On 2005/09/10, at 23:43, Platt Holden wrote:
> Hi Dav,
>
>
>> Sorry for the bad choice of words, I meant to say consciousness. But
>> whatever it is we take in, consciousness and/or thoughts are not
>> "floating
>> around" somewhere and our brain just takes them in. Consciousness is
>> created "inside your head" following physical/ biological chain
>> reactions,
>> which are, as you said correctly, started by external stimuli. At
>> least
>> that's how I see it. Maybe just because I simply can't imagine
>> something
>> as immaterial as consciousness floating around somewhere, whereas
>> I can
>> perfectly grasp the other theory.
>>
>
> By the same token, it's hard for me to imagine how a bunch of
> insensate
> neurons buzzing around inside my head manage to create consciousness.
> That's a theory I can't grasp, whereas the brain as regulator of
> exterior
> consciousness I can grasp even if a bit strange. But, quantum
> physics is
> strange, and it was the quantum physicist Erwin Schroedinger who said
> after years of dealing with the problem, "The external world and
> consciousness are one and the same thing."
>
>
>>> Will science ever find the answer when, as you say, consciousness
>>> other
>>> than your own is inaccessible?
>>>
>>
>> I hate to do this, but in this case I will quote myself (not sure
>> if the
>> original post ever made the list):
>>
>> "...all we can do is try to determine the factors that lead to the
>> creation of consciousness. And I guess however close we get to a
>> complete Big Picture, there will always be a last missing piece in
>> the puzzle, a small "gap" between the last evidence we can gather
>> about the creation of consciousness and the subjective feeling of
>> consciousness itself. This gap is the switch between the "outside"
>> perspective and the "inside" perspective. So, we kinda need to
>> have a bit
>> of faith that we are actually looking in the right direction and
>> that
>> consciousness actually fits in were we want it to fit in."
>>
>
> Yes. And I'll put my bit of faith on Darling and Schroedinger. Of
> course,
> my faith could be misplaced.
>
>
>>> Anyway, I've always been intrigued by the fact that consciousness is
>>> rarely, if ever, made plural. Seems there's only one
>>> consciousness to go
>>> around. Or, as you say, maybe just another play on words.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe it's because your consciousness is the only one you'll ever
>> experience, and you've got no proof whatsoever that there are others
>> consciousnesses out there. Or maybe it's just because
>> consciousnesses is
>> such a horrible tongue twister. ;o)
>>
>
> Both good answers although you raise the issue of "proof" which I
> guess we
> both want to pass on for now. :-)
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Sep 11 2005 - 06:26:33 BST