On 5 Oct, 16:24, Lonlaz <[email protected]> wrote:
> archytas
>
> I can't pretend to be more learned than Rodger Penrose, but I can't
> see why conciousness can't be a very likely byproduct of evolution.
> Obviously our species was well rewarded for devolping the trait. It
> seems that a favorite survival development for species is
> specialization, which only gets you comfortable niche, until your
> environment changes.
>
> Conciousness seems to be the answer to this, it gives us a theater to
> act appropriately in situations that have not happened to us as
> individuals, or even as a species. It's an amazing advange that gives
> us more longevity than being hardwired to respond to a specific
> evironment in a more effcient way.
>
Without it, we wouldn't 'know', much less, know how to act. It's
the only way to get 'thoughts/ideas' associated 'us' as individuals,
which is why I find it analogous to the 'bus' of a CPU: that which
fetches data between the data space (the mind of God as a pool of
abstracts) and memory (this hard-core 4-D universe).
> It sounds like you feel that conciousness is wasted on many
> individuals, or more succinctly, most people waste their
> conciousness. I can't disagree with that. The human species has a
> very interesting balance between contributing as an individual, and
> going along with the herd. Ever since I read 'Germs, Guns, and
> Steel', I can't stop thinking of the collective minds of the human
> race as several different colonies of bacteria giong through their own
> evolutionary process.
*sings*... Every thought is sacred. Every thought is Good....
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
