Doc, I keep coming back to this.  It seems to be the most basic truth, the only 
one we can know absolutely:  awareness exists.  




________________________________
 From: "doctordumb...@rocketmail.com" <doctordumb...@rocketmail.com>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 9:42 AM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SELF-HYPNOTIZE: Channel, End Negativity, Feel 
Good, Achieve Goals  Dr. Shelley S
 


  
I was wondering the same thing. Probably not, but the paradox to finding the 
answer to that question, is that, in order for me to assess such a thing, in 
the moment, I must have a structure in mind, even if it is only a cloud, or an 
atom. So, I can answer it in practical terms, and the answer is no. But I will 
probably never know the answer, absolutely.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote:
>
> Doc, do you think ANY structure is necessary for consciousness?  
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
>  From: "doctordumbass@..." <doctordumbass@...>
> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 9:23 AM
> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: SELF-HYPNOTIZE: Channel, End Negativity, Feel 
> Good, Achieve Goals  Dr. Shelley S
> 
> 
> 
>   
> Thoughts and consciousness are not the same thing. Consciousness or awareness 
> is fundamental, with thoughts secondary. So for thoughts, yes, you need a 
> brain. But for consciousness, the brain structure isn't necessary.
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" 
> > > > > <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote:
> > > (snip)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yup, and it's perfectly natural to find 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > something
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > complex and assume that it must have been 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > created
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by something more complex. This was Darwins 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > genius
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as he showed it isn't the case where biology is 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > concerned.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But not where human consciousness is concerned.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a belief. And a strange one.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > It's also just a belief that biology is responsible for human
> > > > > > > > > consciousness.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Which words did you not understand?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I guess it's just a belief that biology is responsible for my
> > > > > > heartbeat.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Non sequitur. 
> > > > 
> > > > LOL!
> > > > 
> > > > > The heartbeat is a biological thing.
> > > > 
> > > > And I guess the brain isn't......
> > > 
> > > You seem to be losing track of the conversation. The brain
> > > is biological, like the heartbeat; consciousness may well
> > > not be. That's why the notion that consciousness is
> > > biological is just a belief, like the notion that it isnT.
> > 
> > That's really anything funny you know.
> > 
> > To give you a clue: Just try thinking that without a brain.
> > Brains create consciousness, they also create the ability
> > for brains to create and hold models that entirely contradict
> > how brains themselves behave. The Greeks thought that brains
> > were for cooling blood as it went round the body! You can't
> > rely solely on people to work things out philosophically, 
> > they believe sorts of weird stuff.
> > 
> > 
> > > > > > You mystical types start from the wrong place.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm not doing mysticism here. There are very significant
> > > > > thinkers in philosophy and science who are not mystics or
> > > > > believers in God who make the points I'm making.
> > > > 
> > > > So?
> > > 
> > > So it's possible to think evolution doesn't explain
> > > consciousness without being a mystic, which means you
> > > can't blame my views on consciousness on my being a
> > > "mystical type" (if I even am).
> > > 
> > > > > And where they start from is the fact that the biology of
> > > > > evolution doesn't account for human consciousness.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > You claim to understand evolution but have you considered how
> > > > > > an alternative might fit in?
> > > > > 
> > > > > An alternative to evolution? Why would that be necessary? Nothing
> > > > > wrong with evolution as it is.
> > > > 
> > > > Other than that it can't account for human consciousness?
> > > 
> > > Nothing wrong with that. It just means we have to look
> > > elsewhere for an understanding of consciousness. Why 
> > > would we even expect evolution to provide the answers to
> > > all questions? That it doesn't isn't a flaw in evolution,
> > > it's a flaw in our expectations.
> > > 
> > > > PS I know what the "hard" problem is.
> > > 
> > > I'm sorry to hear that. If you didn't know, there'd be
> > > some excuse for your inability to contribute anything
> > > thoughtful to this discussion (not necessarily agreement,
> > > but at least thoughtful disagreement). You want to "win"
> > > without having to do any work.
> > 
> > Win what?
> > 
> > > You're more than welcome to withdraw from the conversation
> > > if it doesn't interest you.
> > 
> > I'm withdrawing because you haven't offered anything new yet.
> > We just go back to where we start. You won't get anywhere without
> > evidence that brains aren't capable of creating consciousness and
> > as every step in brain imaging and understanding gets us closer
> > to thoughts, how to measure them and where they come from, some
> > might say the mystics are in for a bit of a disappointment. Which
> > shouldn't be the case as learning stuff is worth it for its own 
> > sake but a majority still believe in gods and afterlives so it's
> > going to be tricky to convince them and it's probably the sort
> > of thing that people will think they can take or leave and it 
> > won't matter, and they'd be right in every practical way.
> >
>


 

Reply via email to