14 Dec 19
@secondson saidBy "the thought progression", do you mean you changed your mind?
I can see why you have difficulty following a thread. You blend everything said into one context and lose the thought progression with regards to the intent of a particular post relative to succeeding posts.
14 Dec 19
@secondson saidI suggest you post this on the thread I started.
"Do you actually believe I suffer from "stress of uncertainty"?"
Wouldn't anyone considering they don't know for a certainty what lies beyond the grave?
"No, it's not obvious that you would believe such a thing."
Believe what "thing"? That you are under "the stress of uncertainty"?
Without a doubt.
"In your view, not being certain about how to define conscio ...[text shortened]... e stressed by not knowing how consciousness exists at all.
"That's a bit strange."
Yes and no.
14 Dec 19
@secondson saidI'd sum up my stance on the definition of consciousness as follows:
I doubt there are enough hours in a day to discuss the definition of consciousness with you.
I think human consciousness is the ability to receive information through the five senses and remember it, interpret it, react to it, make decisions about it, or act upon it [although perhaps not necessarily all of these things].
In this way, consciousness is the ability to perceive one's existence within an environment and to be aware of one's capacity to affect or be affected by others who also exist in that environment.
This capacity involves access to memories and the ability to recognize oneself as the witness and perpetrator of the events they record. [I believe this unique and still unfolding narrative is the key to personhood, by the way.]
Consciousness, therefore, facilitates the interactions that comprise the substance of our social/communal lives. I think consciousness is a capacity that has evolved from the size, complexity and functionality of our brains. I think consciousness ceases when our brains stop and our biological functions cease.
I think understanding consciousness is one of the current frontiers of human knowledge and exploration.
I think it is perfectly understandable that theists cite the existence of human consciousness as evidence of a creator being.
And I think, in the face of the inevitability and finality of death, the belief that one's consciousness goes on forever is a perfectly understandable human aspiration.
14 Dec 19
@fmf saidI think that is a reasonable summation. It's not exhaustive, but gives a brief synopsis of what consciousness entails from the perspective of human knowledge and exploration.
I'd sum up my stance on the definition of consciousness as follows:
I think human consciousness is the ability to receive information through the five senses and remember it, interpret it, react to it, make decisions about it, or act upon it [although perhaps not necessarily all of these things].
In this way, consciousness is the ability to perceive one's existence within ...[text shortened]... the belief that one's consciousness goes on forever is a perfectly understandable human aspiration.
Of course I disagree with the idea that anything about man ceases to exist after death except his body, but I will shy away from discussing that, as I have been, until the topic of the thread calls for that discussion.
I would ask though why you think it "perfectly understandable" for one to believe consciousness is evidence of a creator, and "that one's consciousness goes on forever" is an "aspiration" and not a legitimate truth?
14 Dec 19
@secondson saidI think those things because I am an agnostic atheist while at the same time I recognize that most people believe in a creator being and most people hope that they will go on to an afterlife.
I would ask though why you think it "perfectly understandable" for one to believe consciousness is evidence of a creator, and "that one's consciousness goes on forever" is an "aspiration" and not a legitimate truth?
I think these things are understandable and reasonable because one offers an explanation for the wonder and mystery of life, and the other offers solace in the face of finite existence and death.
As for why I think theism and religionism are legitimate attempts to ascertain the truth about reality, while, at the same time, I do not subscribe to them, you'll just have to read my posts week in week out, month in month out, year in year out here across umpteen threads about various aspects of the topic. I have made no secret for my personal reasons for my lack of belief in "revealed" religions.
14 Dec 19
@secondson saidWhy do you think this topic does not "call for" discussion of your contention that consciousness lasts forever? Why do you feel the need to "shy away" from it?
Of course I disagree with the idea that anything about man ceases to exist after death except his body, but I will shy away from discussing that, as I have been, until the topic of the thread calls for that discussion.
15 Dec 19
@fmf said
I'd sum up my stance on the definition of consciousness as follows:
I think human consciousness is the ability to receive information through the five senses and remember it, interpret it, react to it, make decisions about it, or act upon it [although perhaps not necessarily all of these things].
In this way, consciousness is the ability to perceive one's existence within ...[text shortened]... the belief that one's consciousness goes on forever is a perfectly understandable human aspiration.
This capacity involves access to memories and the ability to recognize oneself as the witness and perpetrator of the events they record. [I believe this unique and still unfolding narrative is the key to personhood, by the way.]This isn't the case, there are case studies of people with neurological injury who have amnesia such that they have little or no memory of the past and do not form new memories. Personality change is not a necessary consequence of this, see [1], but in another case [2] their ability to imagine themselves in the past or future was impaired, so your statement about memory being important to some aspects of consciousness is supported.
This leads me to some points. I'm wondering about your attempts at a definition of consciousness at the start of the thread, what does one have to be conscious of to count as conscious, or is it a sort of spectrum disorder. Since we'd still think of neurological injury cases like the ones I've cited as being conscious losing all episodic memory is not sufficient to render someone unconscious. Going to sleep is. What do we need to lose in order to lose our consciousness, what is purportedly missing in animals that we have that distinguishes human from animal consciousness?
One aspect is due to the reality check function in the prefrontal cortex. Because the prefrontal cortex is inactive during dreams people, in general, are not aware they are dreaming when they are dreaming, but they know they are awake when they're awake.
I think for a useful discussion of consciousness we need to look at some neuroscience.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Wearing
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Cochrane
- Joined
- 06 May 15
- Moves
- 27445
15 Dec 19
@fmf saidJust want to say that I respect you enough not to pull out just a phrase for some snarky or dismissive reply, as a certain forum "member" (connotations intended) likes to do.
I'd sum up my stance on the definition of consciousness as follows:
I think human consciousness is the ability to receive information through the five senses and remember it, interpret it, react to it, make decisions about it, or act upon it [although perhaps not necessarily all of these things].
In this way, consciousness is the ability to perceive one's existence within ...[text shortened]... the belief that one's consciousness goes on forever is a perfectly understandable human aspiration.
15 Dec 19
@deepthought saidYes, it's maybe a kind of spectrum.
I'm wondering about your attempts at a definition of consciousness at the start of the thread, what does one have to be conscious of to count as conscious, or is it a sort of spectrum disorder.
15 Dec 19
@deepthought saidYes, my attempt that says "This capacity involves access to memories and the ability to recognize oneself as the witness and perpetrator of the events they record" may well be pushing too far on 'consciousness', per se, and moving more towards defining the source of identity or personhood or individuality.
This isn't the case, there are case studies of people with neurological injury who have amnesia such that they have little or no memory of the past and do not form new memories.
