--- Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am always conscious of that "third thing." I
> observe my mind at work. I am aware, for example,
> that this mind is not as good as it was twenty years
> ago. This mind does not like that fact, but that
> which observes the deterioration of my mind is
> supremely indifferent and unaffected by that
> deterioration. So there is a reason for
> distinguishing between consciousness (the observer)
> and awareness (the mind's workings). That is
> neither here nor there, however, as it does not tell
> me whether either one or both will survive the death
> of my body.
One of my favorite dead horses I like to beat:
Consciousness (pure) is not an observer. Giving it
this function implies a relationship to something (the
observed). All perception is of the mind.
Consciousness has nothing to do with mind.
Consciousness is not "located" anywhere. You can't
talk about consciousness other than in negating
relative constraints placed upon it by mind (i.e., not
this, not that). Does this make any sense? If
consciousness is awake to its own consciousness while
the mind is functioning this will be clear. But if
consciousness is identified with mind then its a no go!
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
