The anaogue is the wave in the sea: The wave thinks itself conscious and a person, and screams with horror as it sees its fate is to be annihilated by crashing onto the rocks. It does not understand that it is a part of something bigger and more permanent.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Marchal [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 16 March 1999 11:18 > To: Higgo James > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: consciousness based on information or computation? > > >Bruno, eastern philosophers have denied each of the following and gone on > > >to greater things as a result: > >Consciousness is private. This entails, by definition, an owner. > > Consciousness is subjective. This entails, by definition, a subject. > >Consciousness is personal. This entails, by definition, a person > >James > > > My feeling is that you make a confusion between the ego and the person. > I know eastern philosophers who get higher state of consciousness through > dissolution of ego. But it seems to me they remain living person through > the process (chinese even insist on that point). > In the description of "cosmic consciousness", the "I" (ego) seems to > disappear completely, but the person remains, even if it is in the form > of the Big One or the True Emptyness, etc... (any word used here create > confusion !) > > If you really belief it is possible to be conscious without being some > one, I would be glad if you can give me an explanation, or an exemple, ... > > Of course I aknowledge that it is possible to be conscious without > knowing you are some one (for exemple if you are conscious without being > self-conscious), but being conscious without being some one seems to me a > (pyscho)logical contradiction. > > I miss something, or what ? > > Bruno