On 5/29/2013 8:45 AM, John Mikes wrote:
Brent: after lots of back-and-forth you wrote:
/*"...I don't see the analogy. I don't think consciousness can be negative, or even that
it can be measured by one dimension. "All-or-nothing" would be a function that is
either 1 or 0. If you can be conscious of red and green, then I'd say you are more
conscious than someone who is red/green colorblind (albeit by a tiny amount). In order
to have beliefs about arithmetic _requires that you be conscious of numbers_ and _have a
language _in which to express axioms and propositions. I doubt that simpler animals
have this and so have different consciousness than humans. I don't venture to say less
consciousness because I think of it as multi-dimensional and an animal may have some
_other aspect of consciousness_ that we lack.
Brent "*/
Please consider my definition for that monster of a word (I deny to use):
*_consciousness _*
NOT IDENTICAL to the noun referring to "being conscious (aware!) of" but a
*PROCESS* of
responding to relations.
Your write as though you strongly disagree with me, but I don't see the disagreement. I
agree that consciousness is a process.
Human, animal, stone,idea, anything. The Totality (Everything) that
exists. Including Bruno's favorites (Loebianism, universal anything, numbers, etc.) and
much
more. The infinite complexity we have no access to, only to a small segment.
I don't know what the significance of that is? We can only be conscious of a small finite
part of everything...sure.
I cannot imagine a 'negative' of a process that either goes on, or not. (Maybe the
reverse can
be called so, but that would be the 'triggering of a response' - different from the
response, not
a negative of it.)
Me neither. It was Bruno who implied that consciousness was analogous to a continuous
function that was either >0 or not.
The *_'response'_* is richer than we could 'restrict' (again!) into dimensions
of our
views.
?? What 'response'? Ours?
We may 'see' only some dimensions in the way how *WE ARE CONSCIOUS OF* it.
Are you saying we might see some dimensions in a way we are not conscious of? Certainly
we're not conscious of a lot. Although "unconscious seeing" is kind of metaphorical,
there is blind sight in which there is unconscious response to visual stimuli.
Colorblind, or not.
And your fragment:
/*"...animals have this and so have different consciousness..."*/
refers to a THING, the noumenon of "being conscious of".
So? A process is a thing too.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
