Then we are indeed using different definitions of the word. Yes there is a difference in intelligence between us and chimp, but also in consciousness. If I am conscious of a Self, that is apart and separate from others of my species, and a worm is not conscious of such a thing, is this a measure of consciousness or intelligence This is what I mean when I use the word and it is this I allude to when I say levels of consciousness.
As to souls, well for me the jury is still out on whether such a thing exists at all, that is I do not equate the Self with the soul. On Thursday, 25 October 2012 16:51:08 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote: > > Lee , by consciousness I understand awareness of something like sound > , sight , etc., by evolution I understand the growth from simple > life-forms to complex life-forms. As for the difference between chimps > and humans is not that of consciousness but that of intelligence. You > are trying to say that your soul is more developed than that of chimps > or maybe a chimp is lacking of soul. The whole argument is about us > having individual souls which I do not agree with , I believe in a > universal Soul and the rest to be just dust. > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Lee Douglas > <[email protected]<javascript:>> > wrote: > > Umm I'm not sure I agree with that either RP. What I mean by level of > > consciousness is rather things like, sense of Self, emotions, ability to > use > > tools. If it helps lets us call it scale instead of level. I don't > think > > that level of evolution is correct, not really. I think of evolution > over > > time. We humans shared some 5-6 million years ago a common ancestor > with > > chimps. If we humans have carried on evolving (and we have) and chimps > have > > carried on evolving (as they have) then we share a level of evolution. > We > > have both evolved over the same span of time from our common ancestor. > > > > I do agree though that, I shall use the term, 'Lesser order' animals are > > inferior to us, but that highlights my insistence on grouping by 'levels > of > > consciousness . Is it true to say that chimp is at a lower level of > > consciousness as a human? Well I think it quite correct to suppose so. > > > > However remembering that all of this is in reply to your initial post, > then > > it is clear that some of the creatures we share this planet with can be > said > > to not be conscious at all. Does an Ameba have consciousness? But > perhaps > > more importantly to this discussion, can a creature without > consciousness be > > said to be a 'being'? > > > > Before I go let me just clarify why this phrase 'intensity of senses' > makes > > no sense to me when it comes to consciousness. A falcon has far > superior > > eyesight than a human, but according to how I have defined consciousness > is > > clearly on a lower level than humans. > > > > Personally I don't think that searching for proof of God's existence is > any > > good at all. You either believe such a thing IS or you do not, and that > is > > good enough for me. > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 18:06:20 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote: > >> > >> Lee , what you mean by level of consciousness is actually the level of > >> evolution , but that doesn't mean that the less evolved are in any > >> manner inferior to their highly evolved brethren --humans have the > >> concept of God but animals haven't and still all are equal in the eyes > >> of God even though He has made everyone in a different mold. It is > >> only if we see everyone with an eye of equality that we can be truly > >> compassionate towards all regardless of their position in the > >> evolutionary ladder. > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > Heh you are the master of the non answer, are you a politician? > >> > > >> > I'm going to assume then that yes crows are conscious, and what you > may > >> > call > >> > the level of intelligence, and the intensity of the sense also mean > yes. > >> > Which makes your previous words contradictory. > >> > > >> > This phrase though, 'intensity of sense', makes no sense to me. What > >> > does > >> > it mean then for consciousness for those beings who have more intense > >> > senses? > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 17:26:41 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote: > >> >> > >> >> There is a matter of the intensity of the senses and the level of > >> >> intelligence , but , my friend , crows are beings and not machines - > >> >> ah , robots. > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > Ahhhh RP! You don't change at all sir do you. > >> >> > > >> >> > There are of course many, many people and soooo much literature > that > >> >> > disagrees with your wishy washyness here. So much of it in fact > that > >> >> > I > >> >> > don't even feel the need to defend my stance at all. So let me > just > >> >> > finish > >> >> > by asking you two questions. > >> >> > > >> >> > Are crows conscious? > >> >> > > >> >> > Is a crows consciousness the same as a humans? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 17:08:51 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> That which exist is Being , and consciousness does't have levels > but > >> >> >> parameters -- sound , sight , etc. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > The we disagree again RP. Unless you and I have differing > >> >> >> > concepts > >> >> >> > on > >> >> >> > what > >> >> >> > consciousness is? My cats are conscious, would they have an > >> >> >> > understanding > >> >> >> > of God as a human does? I suspect not, but they are surely > >> >> >> > conscious > >> >> >> > creatures. It may be that I infer I am currently in discourse > >> >> >> > with > >> >> >> > another > >> >> >> > conscious entity, but I'd rather say it is empirically correct > >> >> >> > that I > >> >> >> > am > >> >> >> > doing so rather than it is an inference that I can make. After > >> >> >> > all > >> >> >> > are > >> >> >> > we > >> >> >> > not members of the same species? Without being too general, I > >> >> >> > think > >> >> >> > such > >> >> >> > inferences that I can make about myself as a human must also > hold > >> >> >> > true > >> >> >> > for > >> >> >> > other humans. I must breathe to live, so can I infer that > others > >> >> >> > of > >> >> >> > my > >> >> >> > species must also do the same, or can I claim knowledge that it > is > >> >> >> > true? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > I get what you mean of course, I can ever only really say I > think, > >> >> >> > therefore > >> >> >> > I am. However when an inference takes place day in and day > out, I > >> >> >> > think > >> >> >> > it > >> >> >> > better to regard such 'truth' as knowledge. Thus I know you > are > >> >> >> > conscious, > >> >> >> > as you are human, and I know I am conscious. My cats show all > the > >> >> >> > signs > >> >> >> > of > >> >> >> > being conscious and indeed as you would expect of conscious > >> >> >> > beings. > >> >> >> > the > >> >> >> > both exhibit different attitudes and personalities. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > So once again we are back to the following two questions. What > do > >> >> >> > you > >> >> >> > mean > >> >> >> > by 'being', and at what level of 'consciousness' does this > proof > >> >> >> > of > >> >> >> > yours > >> >> >> > need to be, to be proof? > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > On Wednesday, 24 October 2012 12:20:34 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> As far as a person is concerned , there is only one > consciousness > >> >> >> >> , > >> >> >> >> that is , his. Others are inferred, as also the existence of > god. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Lee Douglas > >> >> >> >> <[email protected]> > >> >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> >> > Meh! I know plankton exist, is it conscious, or would you > not > >> >> >> >> > call > >> >> >> >> > it > >> >> >> >> > a > >> >> >> >> > being? Or perhaps we can discuss levels of consciousness? > >> >> >> >> > Nope I > >> >> >> >> > can't > >> >> >> >> > get > >> >> >> >> > with this argument RP, far too many holes in it. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > On Sunday, 23 September 2012 15:20:45 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> Conscious beings are a proof of God because otherwise an > >> >> >> >> >> unconscious > >> >> >> >> >> Being > >> >> >> >> >> could not be said to exist. Existence is the seed which > finds > >> >> >> >> >> its > >> >> >> >> >> growth in > >> >> >> >> >> life. > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > -- > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -- > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > -- > > > > > > > --
