Guest guest Posted April 29, 2006 Report Share Posted April 29, 2006 Pete, I doesn't need consciousness to see danger, that is already done by the brain before it got conscious. But it needs consciousness to describe and communicate that danger to others. Etc, etc, etc. Consciousness is only needed for communication. Why ? Consciousness works serial same as communcation does. To recognize a danger is processed parallel in several parts of the brain. But to describe that danger later to others is done via serial consciousness. Werner Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > > On Apr 28, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Wim Borsboom wrote: > > > AdvaitaToZen , Pete S <pedsie5@> wrote: > > > > > > Valery at NDS wrote: > > > > > > Consciousness: That annoying time between naps. > > > > > > P: That stroke me as partly true. If it were 100% > > > awful, or 100% bliss, would that content remain > > > conscious long? Consciousness needs change, > > > yet longs for immutability, and there lies the rub, or > > > the annoyance. > > > > That 100 % bliss (any amount of bliss actually) is realized in > > direct AWARENESS though - not consciousness. > > > > It behoves us to distinguish between the meaning of consciousness > > and awareness. " A-ware-ness " has to do with ver-acity or... dharma > > (truth). The Sanskrit root of dharma 'DHA' over time became 'VAR', > > which later became 'wahr' in German, 'vrai' in French and ended up > > as 'ware' in awareness and 'ver' in veracity. > > > > Consciousness is what arises when separation has taken one away > > from - how did Greg say it? - " It's holistic, globality... " > > (Whatever " It " is :-) That's why 'consciousness' contains the > > prefix 'con', expressing that there is an assumed separation between > > parts that consciousness attempts to bridge. > > > > Awareness is 'already aware' prior to consciousness. Consciousness > > is not present in direct-awareness-per-se. Consciousness though may > > remember moments or stretches of direct awareness. > > > > I have come to see consciousness as a reconstructive tool of > > awareness (to deal with what you call " awful " ) and awareness as a > > sort of tool of 'I'. I do not see consciousness as an a priori. (Nor > > actually do I consider awareness to be such.) In any case, > > consciousness cannot be an a priori as it connects two somethings > > prior to it... whatever those 'priors' are. > > > > > > Hi Wim, > > Your post is very interesting. I love it when you > talk dirty (meaning about brain processes) ) > > But, let's keep in mind, that talking about a > distinction between consciousness and awareness > is really talking about words, rather than sensations > in the brain. How could I possibly match that word > to a sensation in my brain that would be the same one > that you labeled so in yours? > > Nevertheless, when you say: " Awareness is 'already > aware' prior to consciousness " that strikes a bell, in > the sense that, information processing happens at > an inorganic level. So if by awareness you mean > the ability of a system to act on information, I fully > agree. If by awareness, as different from consciousness, > you mean a sensation in my head, then I am not sure > what you meant. That word is not as translatable, as say, > toothache. > > Again, when you say: " I have come to see consciousness > as a reconstructive tool of awareness (to deal with what > you call 'awful') " that makes a lot of sense to me because > I see consciousness as evolving primarily as a pain ( danger) > detector, which later started detecting other life enhancing > signals such as light and sound and much later pleasure, > emotions, and even later, in humans, thoughts such > as this. > > Pete > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.