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 
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

??  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.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to