1
   

Proving Subjectivity

 
 
twyvel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 12:08 pm
fresco

Quote:
I have come to the view lately that the a priori of "existence" is communication/interaction from which is evoked "self" and "other". Words are cognitive co-ordinators of interaction within the dynamic flux.


In this view is consciousness emergent?

Quote:
The problem as I see it with "cosmic consciousness" under which (the illusion of) all parts are subordinate to a unified whole is that "consciousness" for me is too anthropocentric to be the central principle. Following Capra, it seems that such a principle might be "life" of which "conscious life" is merely one form.
0 Replies
 
twyvel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 12:39 pm
not working well...
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 04:47 pm
Twyvel,

If we take "time" to be illusary, then "life" as a sustained organizational structuring within time would itself be illusary as would be "consciousness" as an emergent epiphenomenon of "life". But because we seem to be engaged in communication within time in order to say anything meaningful at all we must at least assume "time" as a frame of reference.

I term "consciousness" anthropocentric because it appears to be perculiar to the particular lifeform homo sapiens. This position is not unlike say the position of Piaget on "logic" where he argues that logical thought being a characteristic of (some) adults needs to be accounted for as an emergent developmental phenomenon. Such an account cannot of itself have recourse to "logic" within its formulation. Similarly "consciousness" could not be taken as a priori.

Once again the key issue is "meaning" and what you and I are prepared to take as common axioms.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Nov, 2005 06:25 pm
I agree with all of that.
0 Replies
 
twyvel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 12:08 pm
fresco

Have you not tasted your non-movement? Conceptualized your non-movement? Have you considered the possibility that you (consciousness) never move? Images, sounds, body sensations, pass by………What?

We're transparent. Visually, forms pass by like ice in water passing by water.

Quote:
I term "consciousness" anthropocentric because it appears to be perculiar to the particular lifeform homo sapiens.


Surely there is observing through the eyes of a rabbit, and hearing in the ears of an elephant. What hears, what sees in them, sees and hears in us. What sees them sees us.


Quote:
Once again the key issue is "meaning" and what you and I are prepared to take as common axioms.



Yes, and No.

This has nothing to do with concepts. The act of observing is not a concept. The percept is a concept, a mental phenomena, but observing isn't. That's why observing is a priori. Consciousness, nothing, non-being is the ground of being. Meaning, it takes nothing to observe something. Nothing/void is a necessity, a requirement to observe something; concepts, percepts etc.

Oddly, the intellect can lead us to This, This which is observing the intellect. But it's like going from here to here. It's a pathless path because there's no where to go.






imhv
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2005 03:24 am
Twyvel,

>>>>>..........silence.
0 Replies
 
twyvel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Nov, 2005 01:13 pm
..nice...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 08:27:44