Unconscious consciousness

Portal,

My answer is that there are not simply two states.
In some systems (e.g. Gurdjieff) what we normally call "consciousness" is called "waking sleep" . The illusion is that such a level operates within the control of the subject, but in essence it is said to be little different to sleep walking, in which the body is engaged, as opposed to "real sleep" in which the body is disconnected. Such "normal consciousness" is characterized by internal chatter and circling thoughts which randomly animate the subject (a committee of little selves), who immediately rationalizes his current modus to himself (just like a hypnotized subject rationializes when "caught" in a post hypnotic suggestion) The G system claims that such a state can be transcended but only by "correct work" and some degree of "real control" (permanent Self) can be gained, but with back-sliding the norm.

I partially subscribe to these views which are easily accessible by looking up either Gurdjieff or "School of Practical Philosophy". For a less esoteric approach I would suggest any meditational or spiritual corpus involved in "self observation".

A final point is that the division conscious/unconscious has different meanings for psychoanalysts, medical practioners, and philosophers...the latter being currently heavily engaged with the nature of "consciousness" and "reality". (See David Chalmers references University of Arizona)

Dream Theory and other stuff
Dream Theory

First I would like to say that I am not a biology major so all of my data and research is a conglomerate of random ideas and experiences. I unfortunately can't site specific resources so feel free to approve or disapprove my ideas. This is a long one, sorry about that ahead of time. Enjoy.

Brian/Mind Function:
The human mind is often thought of like a computer, where data is accessed and stored. This is not really an accurate analogy for the way the mind functions due to the structural architecture of the human mind vs. the computer. The human mind is an emersion system that accesses meta data, where as the computer functions on a hierarchical system and accesses raw data.

What the crap am I talking about? If you think of your hard drive and your desktop this is a analogy for the human mind, the desktop is your consciousness, your interface to the data stored in your mind. Using windows for this example, on your desktop you have your main folders such as ?'My Documents.' Within that folder you have other folders such as ?'My Pictures.' This system where there is a main folder and sub folders is a hierarchical system. Within these folders are either more folders or actual data. The pictures in your ?'My Pictures' folder are physically located there on your hard drive, no where else (not counting things like links and multiple copies that sort of stuff).

A better analogy for the mind is the internet with Google as your interface. Google is your consciousness where you ask an associative question, like ?'leaf' and Google searches the internet for ?'leaf.' What Google finds and reports to you is not actual data but associative data called metadata (meaning it doesn't download all the websites to your hard drive, but shows you links based on information about that site). Furthermore the links that are on the top of the Google search are the most relevant links it could find (most popular, most exact match, so on), that is an emersion system (in a field of data a "question" is asked, that question allows different data to "emerge" from the larger pool of data).

This is the way the mind works, but more efficiently than Google. The differences are that the metadata in your mind are actual associative structures (nerves, and neural pathways), and that unlike Google which eventually brings you to raw data (files stored on a server), there is no raw data in your mind, it is all metadata. How? Unlike raw data (like in a jpeg literally one pixel after another described in binary) or metadata in the computer world sense (data that references or describes raw data, "this is a picture of a leaf"), the metadata of your mind accesses hardware (this is the state that I was in when I was looking at a leaf, or these are the associations I made when looking at a leaf), your mind never saves an actual copy of the data. If you try to think of an image of a leaf (without having just looked at one) it will be very difficult to imagine a full detailed image (those with photographic memory have very strong metadata abilities). This ability to create a state through association is also why people have emotional reactions to things like memories or music. The mind is also similar to Google and the internet or even a browser in that it puts most the most relevant data on the top (or in the case with the internet there is the "super highway" the largest and fastest pipeline for data, or bookmarks on your browser) that way you can assesses the data you use most often very quickly or if your accessing something not used as often it becomes more difficult.

This brings me to thinking, creation, or imagination. When you are trying to find some obscure piece of information on the internet you have to do many searches and go through various sites and links to eventually find what your looking for, it is the same with the brain. The process of brain storming (or any thinking situation really) is similar in that you are thinking of a particular subject and your mind goes through various association, and in the end you may solve or realize something not by the original thought or association but through an avenue of associations you have made. The computer is flawed here in the creation process because though through the internet you can search metadata, it cannot create metadata or associations (at this point). You cannot ask the computer to make you an image of a leaf the way you can image one that may not exist. The reason for this again is because not only is mind metadata associations but also references the hardware of your brain. Meaning it can take pieces of the associations you may have with leaves and put them together to form a new leaf. Where as Google cannot look for pictures of a leaf and then combine those pictures into a new one based on associations of what a leaf is and then associate that new leaf as a leaf. Beyond the functional aspect of creating a new image and forming associations, the reason why Google can't do this is because its dealing with computer metadata which is actually just a reference to raw data. At no time does Google "know" what it is showing you, it just assumes that what it is showing you is a leaf because the metadata says it's a leaf (if I label an image of my foot as a leaf, Google will say it's a leaf).

In conclusion the mind functions on an associative emersion system that accesses metadata which is associative information that allow your mind to produce states on the hardware level.

The Function of Sleeping:
Now the question why do we sleep, what is sleeping? We can look at this question a different way by asking what happens when we get tired? There are two types of tired, physical and mental. I think we can all relate to those differences. One is when you start getting groggy, you are un able to think straight, your head starts to hurt, its hard to focus (keeping your eyes open, paying attention to anything), this is mental fatigue. Physical fatigue is when you've been literally running around all day burning a lot of fuel and your energy has been used up. On the physical end sleep is easy, your body needs time to recuperate, process food and store energy while your not running around. The reason why it does this is because creating energy takes energy not to mention making repairs. If your body was to try to do this while you were active the cost in energy would be astronomical, as well as you wouldn't be able to store more energy than you were using.

Mental fatigue is a bit different. The reason we get mentally tired is not because of energy loss (though it can be a factor), but because of associative breakdown. Again what am I talking about? We have determined that the mind functions on associations, and the process of thought and creation is an exploration and building/combining of those associations, but the accessing of that metadata is not flawless. With the experience of looking for obscure data on the internet through Google, you go through a lot of different links/sites. Often we find ourselves at a dead end or at information that maybe wasn't quite what we were looking for, or even we find the information but it wasn't of the quality we wanted. In our searching we may even stop mid-way-through while exploring an avenue, possible leaving that browser window open and opening another one. Sometimes we find a link that looks interesting only to learn that the link is broken, or the site is not there. These same things play out in our mind as we go through our day.

In any given situation or experience we are accessing metadata/associations constantly. How many times have you been doing something or thinking about something only to get disrupted or side tracked? How many times have you been working, trying to figure something out, and you go through tons of ideas and thought processes in order to work? I think we all go through this everyday, from the most complicated tasks to the smallest ones. Ever have tons of browser windows open, or different programs running at the same time? Your computer slows down, possible even freezes needing a reboot. Often times it helps to make a list, or what I do with smaller task is remember how many tasks there are in order to remember what they were ("write about dreams, 1, check email, 2, make phone call, 3, ok remember I have 3 things to do"). This is the associative emersion system at play. I have just set up a mental bookmark, 3 things to do.

So why do we get mentally tired? In order to function our brain must work and be efficient. As the day progresses our "bookmarks" become so many, combined with "broken links", and "open windows," that our mind has difficulty following the correct or the most efficient pathways of associations, that it starts to slow down. Brain waves are waves of electrical activity that constantly flows through a persons mind. This is another aspect of mind metadata that is different than computer metadata. Mind metadata is not a "single file" but a pathway of neurons. A given piece of mind metadata could be any number or combination of neurons long. In order to think correctly the physical pathways of those neurons, which are actually metadata or associations, must be complete in order for ideas/brain waves/electricity to flow through them. The effect of daily activity (association exploration), causes the network of metadata (neural pathways) to become less efficient or even breakdown. This is why we get mentally tired.

The Function of Dreams:
So how does this all fit in with dreaming? Forming associations is an active process due to the nature of mind metadata. As I have said mind metadata functions by being a stored "image" of a mind state. In order to form and explore associations/metadata, we "experience" those states. Dreaming is the process of the mind repairing itself, and maintaining efficiency. In dreams we "experience" our "broken links" and "open windows" in order to form complete associations to "fix" and improve our brains, allowing the flow of our networks to maintain integrity. This is why often our dreams seem nonsensical or bizarre. When I first noticed this I was able to keep better track of "broken link" experiences and notice how they came up in my dreams. As an example if I saw that someone had the screen name Mike I might start to think about my friend mike because I haven't talked to him in a while, but I don't finish the thought and continue to read the post. Because I "opened up a can" of associations about my friend mike that I did not explore, and I felt that there was something left (that I hadn't talked to him and wanted to) there's a good chance that that night I would dream about my friend Mike. I notice these "broken link" correlations all the time now. I have also been able to point them out to other people and there dreams, often when I am spending a good deal of time with them.

Lucidity and Quality of Dreams:
Lucid dreaming? Why are your dreams they way they are? I use the term quality in the sense of how things are not as in their value. The quality of dreams and lucid dreaming are determined by who you are, and the way you experience life. I for one am an Artist and see myself in my life often from the third person perspective. What do I mean? Well by third person perspective I mean that as I go through my life or my daily activities I often view myself or have the perspective of myself as "one who is doing," not "I am doing." For this reason I have a tendency to dream in either third person perspective, or I have a large degree of control over myself (most of the time I have full-control of myself and my dreams).

The reason I have this kind of Lucidity is because I am in the practice of experiencing myself and the world around me as an object. Therefore in my dreams which are associations of my experience of reality, I can see and control myself as an object within the dream ("I am one who is in a dream," not "I am dreaming"). If you are not in the practice of doing this, it's not an easy task, or a necessary one. Lucid dreams are in no way better than normal dreams (though they can be more fun). On the contrary I would say that Lucid dreaming can lead to less restful sleep in that your ability to control the dream does not allow for your brain to freely explore and "fix" your networking. The practical pay off is if you can control to the degree that you can end your dream or start a new one. This to me is a reasonable balance because in my experience which I'm sure all of you can relate to there are some dreams that are not worth having in the short run. Even this level of control has its draw backs due to unconscious repercussions (which I'll get into later).

Those of you that do have lucid dreams my tips for remaining in the dream (because often as you exercise control in a dream you start to wake up and/or lose the dream) is if you find yourself losing the dream stop fighting or continue with the dream before you exercised control. What I mean is in the example of trying reading a piece of paper, you may become frustrated by the fact that you cannot discern any words. At this the dream will start to fade because you begin to fight your dream. You start to concentrate more on the words attempting to forcibly decipher it. If you continue to do so you will lose the dream. If you stop trying to read the paper and go back to why you picked up the paper to begin with then your dream may continue, or if you relinquish control and allow yourself to "turn away" from the piece of paper. The big trick in controlling your dreams is that the direction you attempt to push your dream in must exist in the dream realm. As soon as you start to push towards reality based situations then your dream will start to fade. The reason for this is that while you are in the "dream realm" your mind is actually processing a series of associations that may not have a sensical connection. If you start to guide your mind away from this nonsensical path of associations then you will wake up. As a final tip, if you have trouble controlling your dreams, and you would like to be able to at least end a dream, or start a new one, I have found that blinking does the trick. A blink is a short physical act that if you can bring yourself to do it, only requires you mind to leave the dream space for a moment. Blinking also tends to work well because it is not something that is regularly simulated in the dream realm. The reason for this is because when we are awake we often do not consciously blink, so it is difficult to simulate it through associations due to the lack of metadata surrounding blinking.

The quality of dreams also has to with who you are in that what kind of metadata you store, and therefore what kind of metadata your mind can use when building these experiences. I for one am an artist, and I spend a lot of time noticing visual details about things. Because of this my dreams are very detailed and vivid. As another example I had a roommate in college that paid a lot of attention to color in his work, therefore his dreams mainly consisted of color fields. It is important to note that I am not talking about casual experience of life. We all have eyes in our head so we all see a lot of images, color, and detail. It is my job to notice detail so I expend a lot of mental ability storing that kind of metadata consciously and I use that data regularly so there are many associations connected with visual detail. These are the kinds of things that give our minds the pieces to build dreams from.

The Meaning of Dreams and the Subconscious:
So if dreams are just fragments of associations during the day then do dreams have any meaning? Yes. There are two reasons for this. Though dreams maybe be nonsensical they still are explorations of your actual metadata. This means that though the things in your dreams maybe be put together in a strange way, each element is something from your of experience of reality. This doesn't mean that all dreams or all the elements of a dream are significant, if there is a chair in your dream it most like is a chair. The only time it becomes more than a chair is if you have special associations/metadata with chairs or that chair in particular. The meaning of elements in dreams can only be determined on a individual bases. Those dream books that give meaning to various dream elements are unreliable in that everyone has different associations with different things. They do have some "fortune cookie" validity as well as if you read them all the time they may be more accurate. The reason for this is that on the fortune cookie side, if you make your "definitions" broad enough there's a good chance that many people have the same associations, and if you read those books often enough you will associate those elements of dreams with the given definitions.

The second reason for meaning in dreams is the subconscious, not to be confused with unconscious. As I just said dreams are made up of actual metadata therefore their reality based associations may hold true. This goes even deeper in that within our metadata there is also sub-metadata. (Here I go again.) Sub-Metadata are the associations our metadata has to other metadata. Wha? Our associations have associations of their own to other associations. Again wha? I have a friend that has this thing with clouds and the sky. There is something about the sky and clouds that captivates him. To him the sky is a vast open space where things change and nothing is constant. It is vast and specific, easily changes and flows. Now on the surface level when I say "sky" to him his mind finds the metadata for the term sky. "Yeah the sky is clear today," maybe is his response. He looked up at the sky and thought about it. His mind found metadata on the term sky. He noticed that among this metadata about ?'sky' that this sky match his metadata criteria for a clear sky, thus producing the response. However below that surface level of cognition the sub-metadata may have caused him to say, "yeah the sky is clear today." Meaning that when his mind found the metadata on ?'sky' the brain also receives the sub-metadata that the sky represents a vast open space where things change and nothing is constant. His response not only means that the sky is clear (a statement of fact) but also a reference to a vast open space where things change and nothing is constant. Thus there is "sky" a term that brings about ?'sky' metadata, and then there is sub-metadata of what ?'sky' "means" to him.

This sub-metadata forms a network of its own, what we refer to as the subconscious. As we talked about earlier our consciousness functions like Google which is an emersion system. Our subconscious is also an emersion system. Now imagine that Google had a Google within it. When we type in ?'leaf' it doesn't just grab anything that has leaf in it. First or bellow the ?'leaf' search it searches for what ?'leaf' means to begin with. Then it would use the top sub-Google "results" to then do a search of the Google results. This is the subconscious at work. When we analysis our dreams not only do the elements contain meaning but how they fit together or our subconscious also contains meaning. Because the subconscious is also an emersion system and that it is a "conscious" it falls pray to the same wear that our conscious does. This is why sometimes we have dreams that don't seem to have any meaning, when we look at the pieces and how they fit together sometimes we realize things like, "oh I'm not completely over my grand mother dying" or something of that nature. On the subconscious level we may have not "explored" all of our sub-metadata and so it comes up in our dreams.

This brings me to the possible negatives of lucid dreaming in which we do not experience what we don't want to. Dealing with the subconscious is obviously tricky, there is the possibility that when we avoid these dream we allow for those "frays" in our associations. If these "frays" are in fact subconscious frays then possible over time they may cause repression (I'm not saying it does, it's just that I can see it as a possibility).

Using my model for the mind, we can see that repressions or abnormal associations what causes many mental issues. I read about a case in which a girl had delusional schizophrenia. In an attempt to figure out why psychologist brought in her parents. Now the girl insisted that her parents had telepathy (ability to communicate to each other without the use of words) and would use it to talk about her, which is a paranoid delusion. When they brought the parents in during the interview the girl told her parent that she had been diagnosed with delusional schizophrenia, the parents looked at each other, and then denied that there was anything wrong with her. She then said, "See they're doing it. They're talking about me." Her parents looked at each other, and then denied that they were talking about her. What this illustrates is what is called a double bind. The parent are in fact "talking" to each other, and about their daughter, but they are doing it non-verbally, however by denying that they are communicating when they clearly are, their daughter was forced to come up with a nonsensical association/reason in order complete the network/logic of the experience. This is a severe example, I am not trying to say that all repression or "broken" associations will cause schizophrenia. It is possible however that long term effects of repression may cause negative consequences. What does this mean in the end? Well simply allow yourself to think through and experience whatever is going on in your life. This will also cut down on bad dreams, nightmares, and re-occurring dreams. If there is nothing to "fix" then it won't come up.

So that's my theory in a nutshell. Hope you enjoyed the read.

truth
OZ, thank you. Very interesting, what I understood of it. Your analogy model of the mind/brain is intriguing. But, of course, the analogy does not pretend, I am sure, to exhaust the complexities of the brain/mind system. Your concept of metadata is interesting. I've always thought of simple empirical "facts" as little theories, a step above the British empircists' "sense data." Is this what the "meta" stands for?
Your model of the role of the unconscious distinguishes between the SUBconscious and the UNconscious. I think of the former as mental experience that is out of awareness but capable of being called into consciousness, like the feeling of my butt on the chair right now,, if someone brings it to my attention. Unconscious material is to me repressed material that I cannot bring to awareness without help or in disguised form in dreams.
We were talking earlier about not being able to read signs in dreams. It seems to me that since the dream is MY construction, I cannot learn anything new from reading, say a street sign. I can only see that it IS a street sign. Its content is not available to me as NEW KNOWLEDGE unlike an actual street sign in my waking state.
You certainly have given this a lot of thought. Congratulations.
By the way, does your concept of "double bind," with its connection to schizophrenia owe anything to Gregory Bateson's similar notion.

I wrote an analogy of the mind and thought in another forum that was partly similar. Very interseting. I really enjoy the google analogy. Very creative. Very indepth did you happen to just write this or had the basis's fot it. Extracting information and experience from a dream would be very contriversial as well, because everything that you would be dreaming would come from you so you would have already known or experienced, But can you set up different experiences in your dream and play them out. or would it not play out correctly. The thing with the sky was kindove intreaging too about how he dreams his conceptions of "his" sky. So I took the liberty of trying to dream up my own sky. and it was crazy. instead of clouds i decided to make what everyone knows as clouds and exchanged it with daisys. The funny thing is that it actually worked. In my dream the sky had daisy's in place of the clouds. crazy

Re: Unconscious consciousness
How about I train myself to sleep while actually being awake. Will that work?

That's a hell of a name to give yourself, I like your avatar.

This was the first time I had written the whole thing out, but I've been milling the whole dream/mind over for awhile now. It's defiantly not a solidified theory, but I also don't have time to write a whole book (not to mention it would be a little much to post in a thread ). The "Double Bind" isn't mine at all, I can't remember the psychologist name so your probably right. The Double Bind theory has always stuck out in mind, and I have found it to hold true.

About 11:00 last night my 8-year old son came out into the living room "looking for...looking for...looking...why can't you find anyone?" He says.

I realize he's sleepwalking. I sleptwalked as a kid. It's weird.

truth
OZ, if you want to look up the author of the "double bind" theory (as it pertains to schizophrenia), he is Gregory Bateson, the philosopher and psychological anthropologist--and third husband of Margaret Mead. I think the thesis is found in his book, Steps toward an Ecology of Mind (?).

As a child, i taught myself to be aware while dreaming, that i was dreaming, in order to be able to wake up if i found myself in a nightmare. I retained the ability well into my late twenties, but it has faded. I rather suspect that the "unconscious" portion of my mind didn't like that "loss of freedom," and so it switched to other matters. However, i've not had a nightmare in my entire adult life. In the period just after the last time i recall taking over control of a dream, i began to have all sorts of odd dreams. I began to have dreams for which i was entirely a spectator, as though i were watching a motion picture. These dreams would sometimes actually have "stars"--i recall that James Garner was the "star" of one of them, but i don't recall the others that well. I also had dreams which were essentially animation--i.e., cartoons. In those dreams (for which the artwork was usually a watercolor wash), i would myself be an animated character, usually an animal of some sort.

I've come to the conclusion, though, that it's not a good idea, as our dreams are likely the flip side of consciousness, in that the "other-than-self-conscious" portions of our minds live their lives then.

truth
Setanta, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY interesting. I would simply love to be part of an animation dream.
I too haven't had a nightmare in my adult life. I used to have them as a child when I suffered my annual high fever stomach flu: usually powerful images of gigantic cosmic forces threatening to collide, like planets, right over my head.
I no longer have wet dreams either.

This was all the result of a very prosaic experience, as well, JLN. We had a "scholastic magazine," entitled My Weekly Reader. I was reading a story therein, in which a girl dreamt that she travelled into space. They spun the story out, and i was getting bored, when they got to the crunch. Her father and brother were both on the same lifeline in zero g, when the line snapped, and they both were propelled into the inky void. They posed to you the dilemna of whom she should save, and directed you to a page at the back of the magazine for their solution.

There answer was that she should wake up, she was dreaming, remember? I was so p.o.'ed that they had pulled such a cheesey trick on me. Well, not long thereafter, i was in the midst of a nightmare, when the voice of my conscious mind spoke, saying: "Wake up!" -- i did, and the nightmare was ended. Thereafter, i worked on the idea, and gained a remarkable amount of control in my dreams.

But, as i've mentioned, the ability slipped away, and my dreams became territories of such a radically different character, that such an "ability" no longer mattered. As i've also noted, i eventually decided that i was "cheating" my other than conscious mind. Now, almost thirty years after the last dream i recall controlling, i've finally returned to dreaming in what might be described as "an ordinary fashion."

Ever since i have been messing around and trying to control my dreams the less and less I have them all though when i do they are more intersesting. Has anyone noticed the time differencial between reality and dreams, sometimes you are dreaming for 8 hours in reality but it seems like 20 minutes?

I've always been told it was the other way around, the dream actually last a very short period of time, around ten to fifteen minutes, though it may seem longer. Most nights you have quite a few dreams, though most are never realized.

You want to blend your unconscious with your conscious try magic mushrooms... just be warned you can lose control, and forget what's real and whats the imagined a liberating experince none the less.

I don't know for sure but i don't that it brings out your uncontious but instead it recreates your imagination like a dream. The only thing about it is that your not uncontious, so how could you blend the two? Good thought.

well you need to be unconsious to dream... so with the aid of these guys you dreaming while you consious in a way it's the closet you will get to the unconsious while being consious, read up on this from Terrence Mckenna.

This is way sharmans enter the "spirit world" which can be seen in a way as the collective consiousness, which intself is another very intresting thought.

Don't know for sure but is there a connection between the nighmares and the sickness??

truth
Tagged___, I read in works by psychological anthropologists that shamans are often people with high intelligence and who are "infected" (I can't think of the right term) with the deepest neurotic processes of their people. They sometimes refer to these as "ethnopsychoses" (aspects of what you refer to perhaps as their collective unconscious). These shamans, we all know, also have ways to enter their unconscious--autohypnosis perhaps. Their techniques (dances, chanting, rattles, drums, drugs, etc.) also serve to steep their patients into the same "collective" state of mind. While they are "there" suggestions and other instructions may be given which are only effectively given and received in that state--not when in a normal state.

Would all those rituals be pretty much the same as meditating perhaps? I would think so; I would also think that certain people might meditate in different ways as you sort of said. Maybe being able to go into your subconscious or whatever you would like to call it comes as you become one with yourself (meaning understanding you as a person on this earth or whatever hopefully you get the idea).