21 Oct 15
Originally posted by josephwThought and consciousness are NOT the same thing. Thought is a goal driven attribute.
Do you think/believe that creativity, as an attribute, is a result/consequence of our ability to think?
Then isn't thinking an indication of conscientiousness which gives us the ability to appreciate the creative process, and the thing created, whether it be an idea or a poem or a work of Art?
Then isn't conscientiousness intrinsic to assigning value ...[text shortened]... s of the same thing? Isn't thought then the evidence for the awareness of self-existence?
I want to create this animal in stone, a carving', that is thought.
Consciousness is something most animals have, conscious of the environment, danger, food, sexual arousal, and so forth but that is, by itself, not thought.
That is awareness of what is around you.
Consciousness therefore is akin to awareness.
But you can be aware of those around you but unable to utter a single thought, like if you have the limited brain of an animal for instance. They are perfectly aware but you are not going to catch them thinking about what those dots of light in the night sky are, they could be aware of the existence of them but unable to think through anything about what they are in reality.
21 Oct 15
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI certainly have never thought of it that way. I can think of someone, or think of an action or think of the sky. I would quite happily interchange 'imagine' and 'think' in many sentences. Even most of my logical and abstract thinking does not involve putting it into words. My mind does often add running commentary to thoughts but only really covers a fraction of what gets thunk.
Language is pretty important in this. We tend to talk about "imagining" smells, or "picturing" scenes. When we talk about thinking we tend to mean something verbal - a string of words - it's an extension of imagining a sound.
21 Oct 15
Originally posted by SuzianneIt made more sense in context.
Why do you assume he meant "consciousness" when what he said was "conscientiousness". He even said it more than once.
Granted, the difference is subtle, but not nonexistent.
I would say it is significant, and if that is what he intended then what he said doesn't make a lot of sense, or at least needs more explanation.
Maybe, maybe not, considering you managed to misspell the same word multiple times.
Which word did I misspell?
I do misspell a lot of words, and really quite heavily on a spell checker. I also frequently type incorrect words, or words out of order. But I sense that you only chipped in in order to troll, as is your custom.
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by SuzianneConscientiousness describes the property of having a strong sense of duty or morals; josephw's post finished with a couple of rhetorical questions and in the second he described it as the property of having a sense of "awareness of self-existence". I agree with twhitehead, he clearly meant consciousness.
Why do you assume he meant "consciousness" when what he said was "conscientiousness". He even said it more than once. Granted, the difference is subtle, but not nonexistent.
[b]Is it thinking when my fingers manage to spell out the correct words?
Maybe, maybe not, considering you managed to misspell the same word multiple times.[/b]
22 Oct 15
It is not clear what Freaky was on about with his aeroplane story, and he seems disinclined to explain, but it appears to be this:
1. He believes the earth is flat.
2. He believe the phrase 'straight line' means 'horizontal line on a map'.
3. He believes the statement 'a straight line is the shortest distance between two points' means that a horizontal line on a map is always shorter than a line at some angle to the horizontal.
4. He believes that only map projections that show lines of latitude horizontally are accurate maps of the real world.
Anyone else care to guess as to what weird thoughts go on in his brain?
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by DeepThoughtJeez! Of course, consciousness. 😕
Conscientiousness describes the property of having a strong sense of duty or morals; josephw's post finished with a couple of rhetorical questions and in the second he described it as the property of having a sense of "awareness of self-existence". I agree with twhitehead, he clearly meant consciousness.
Back to square one. I'm supposing there's a link between consciousness and thought. It seems one can't have one without the other. Sonhouse makes a good point with animals. It appears animals don't think about their existence in the sense of self-awareness as do we humans. It seems we are aware of our existence (consciousness) by reason of our ability to think. Or maybe it's the other way around.
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhat is the shortest route between two points on a horizontal plain?
It is not clear what Freaky was on about with his aeroplane story, and he seems disinclined to explain, but it appears to be this:
1. He believes the earth is flat.
2. He believe the phrase 'straight line' means 'horizontal line on a map'.
3. He believes the statement 'a straight line is the shortest distance between two points' means that a horizontal ...[text shortened]... ps of the real world.
Anyone else care to guess as to what weird thoughts go on in his brain?
What is the shortest route between two points on a curved surface?
A strait line. Isn't it?
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by josephwWell now, its the fact that you didn't answer the question. But then, it was the fact that that was the most likely explanation. Sonhouse too readily dismissed animals as being unable to think but gave no explanation as to why he would think that.
What makes you think my ego has anything to do with why I think that?
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot sure what Freaky was thinking, but a horizontal line is perpendicular to a vertical line, making them both strait lines in relationship to each other. Perceptually speaking.
Yes. Oddly though Freaky seems to think it is a horizontal line (not the same thing at all).
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadWell, it would go a long way, if you wanted to know why I think animals don't think the same way as humans, if you wouldn't insinuate negatively concerning my ego. I can't imagine why you would even throw that into the discussion.
Well now, its the fact that you didn't answer the question. But then, it was the fact that that was the most likely explanation. Sonhouse too readily dismissed animals as being unable to think but gave no explanation as to why he would think that.
I've heard humans talking about thought and thinking, but I've never heard an animal speak their mind. I have observed animals and can tell by their behavior whether they're scared or hungry or content, but I couldn't tell what they're thinking.
22 Oct 15
Originally posted by josephwI threw it into the discussion because it is the only reason I could think of, and in my experience it is the main reason people discount the ability of animals to think without warrant.
Well, it would go a long way, if you wanted to know why I think animals don't think the same way as humans, if you wouldn't insinuate negatively concerning my ego. I can't imagine why you would even throw that into the discussion.
I have observed animals and can tell by their behavior whether they're scared or hungry or content, but I couldn't tell what they're thinking.
Yet for some reason you were quite ready to pronounce their capabilities and you knew exactly what they were not thinking.(their existence in the sense of self-awareness).