Concepts about people, and real people beyond concepts

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 1:33 pm

On 2005-04-09 13:59, Nestor wrote:
...But, absolutely nobody has denied, and even has accepted, “subjectivity” as a fact.

If subjectivity exists, objectivity must also exist. If there is darkness, there must be light. ...

you seem to have found the clue, understanding what that 'objectivity doesn't exist' is all about and thus prooving your own assumption wrong - brilliant

of course objectivity as a definition exists, but it cannot apply to us because we're part of this system we're reasoning about.
From an 'external' abstract viewpoint it's perfectly ok, so we called it a virtual (or imaginary) state.

that light/darkness dualism is exactly the same.
There is no 'darkness' at all, we just sense only a small part of the radiation spectrum with our eyes - so it applies only in a restricted, preconditioned environment, like the 'objectivity' of human senses.

cheers, Tom

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 8:04 pm

On 2005-04-09 13:59, Nestor wrote:
If subjectivity exists, objectivity must also exist. If there is darkness, there must be light. If there is humidity, there must be an opposite that is dryness, and so forth.

...

I firmly believe that when a person has more consciousness than other, he or her is more objective,

...

Of course, as you all, I believe that absolute objectivity is not in the reach of human nature, but that there are levels of grasp to it. To me it is shockingly obvious that there are people with MORE, and people with LESS consciousness; and that people with more consciousness are better than those with little consciousness.

I don't think the need for oposits is universal. What is the oposit of a dog with 4 legs? Also, in my world objectivity does not come in different levels. It is either there, or it is not. This is because I link objectivism with positivism. I think that when a person makes conclusions, there are levels of right and wrong. Some things may bee seen right, and others wrong. In my world, objectivism is about being 100% right. I don't think we can be so, when talking about human traits. Therefor it may be levels of truth and false asumptions. The very tricky part about people is, that sometimes contradictions can both be rigth - because there are so many things influencing us. Likevice, things which fit together may not be true - even if one of them are.

skwawks · Post by **skwawks** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 8:20 pm

conciousness!!
"bass players go deep" right nestor ?

What is conciousness ....do we float in a sea of conciousness and are therefore inextricably linked with every other being floating in the same sea, through that sea or are we little fragments of conciousness only able to communicate by outputting and receiving energy ?
there seems to be a tradition of the oneness of all things and that it is possible to experience that state . would that be an objective or a subjective experience .i guess you could argue that it's objective because the isolated,emotional,prejudicial self might not be present in the experience in which case what is experiencing what, or, you could argue that it's subjective because the only thing present is the Self which of course is experiencing the Self .
Maybe we are just fractal being ,picking it's nose out of boredom

I tend to believe that conciousness is a sea and we are little fishies

Post by **hubird** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 9:19 pm

On 2005-04-09 13:59, Nestor wrote:
people with more consciousness are better than those with little consciousness.

This quote just showes that you use the word conciousness in a normative way, in fact like the word conscience, which is a totally different thing.
So your argument is just pointing to itself, it's true if you agree about your 'definition' of consciousness.

Unintentionally, It also points to yourself, as your analysis obviously worked for you...the one who invited that definition.

I'm telling you, you won't believe how many buildings you could fill with books about that subject you started here.
Obectivity and subjectivity, it's the main theme in science since Kant, it starts with Newton's objectified empirism and ends with the discovery and proof of the relativity of nature, meaning the end of objectivity.
(Can you believe your life will be about three seconds longer if you live on the top off the Eyffel Tower in Paris, just because your velocity is faster up there and time is slowed down a bit?).

Now you can do two things:

asking yourself, how is it possible that all top scientists in the world, including and even specially the philosophers, had to leave the Newton world...tho they lost there scientific base which was prooved to be right since ages, and now the opposite was proved, scientificly even, by experiment...
They were shocked those times, and every first year student gets (or should get) this scientific main dilemma learnt, at least during the philosophy colleges.
It's about the fundamentals of science, it's about just objectivity.

Just read The dancing Wu-Li Masters written by scientist/fylosopher Gary Zukav, it was a main seller, it shows very nice and very clear the global scientific discussion about objectivity.
You'll be pleased with the way he combines buddhistic thoughts (about 'how we are related to reality') with the for classical scientists perplexing discovery of principal relativity.

Or, you can say, discussion? whatever, I live my life, and my brains have told me that my findings are 'true' (as they worked for me).

If you ask me, this makes it your own private solution, nothing more and nothing less.
That's ok. with me, as I'm glad you, or anyone, gets grip on how to live one's life.
At the same time, I don't feel the need for much discussion then, because you're approach is rather personnal, but 'thanks for your thoughts'

But forget about that 'If subjectivity exists, objectivity must also exist', you wouldn't get away with this with any scientist, be it a physicist, a philosopher or a linguist, it's nonsense, in a literally way.
They are reciprocal excluding concepts, as opposed to extremes like cold and warm, which are just there, even as products of human thinking (and even when accepting the relativeness of perceiving

If objectivity is the subject, 'consciousness' says nothing about the fundamental discussion which is going on now for more than 100 years

So, if you ask me, the 'trueness' of your objectivity claim is relative, to you namely, and there's nothing wrong with that

cheers

BTW - I'm sure some of the most cruel criminals in history were extremely '(self)concious', not alone of themselves but also of their victimes.
Remember 'Silence of the lambs'?
Kind of like that

[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2005-04-10 18:22 ]

kensuguro · Post by **kensuguro** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 12:47 am

whoa, consciousness... this is like going through the syllabus for my cognitive science class.. We just had that like 2 weeks ago.

So anyway, consciousness. Here's my shot from what I know. Again, "the" answer is yet to be found. At a conceptual level, I believe consciousness is the ownership we claim of our perceptual experience. This paper I read by a guy called Antonio Damasio. He says that we all have a movie in the brain, a multimedia show of all the senses. "Self" automatically claims ownership of the movie. What is interesting is that he starts giving neurological background, despite still developing, on this idea. So, I guess it's a combination of conscioussness and self awareness (dunno if they're different from each other).

Damasio also points out some interesting points about the mind. The problem with our trying to grasp the concept of consciousness is that essentially, we're using the mind to study the mind. The problem with this is similar to the study of culture. You cannot be aware of strange traditions and world views only common in a specific culture, if you're stuck in it. And with the brain, you might get lucky and take it out and check it out. The mind you can't have a 3rd person study it. (because we're all subjective beings!) But, an interesting thing that the mind can do is to use all the representations it knows of, and uses them to create a representation of itself. Which sounds confusing to me.. but my impression is that the mind creates a representation of itself. So, by doing so, the mind can view itself and be conscious of itself. I'd call it self awareness I think. I'm still quite confused about this, because it's new material for me. But it sounds interesting.

Then there are materialistic studies of consciousness, such as chemicals in the brain or electric pulses. These come from the study of coma, sleep, or fainting. All of which the body can be fully functional, while things go on in the brain. So, neurologists are fairly sure consciousness has to do with the brain, they're still not quite sure as to what causes it. It's also only recently that they're figuring out how anesthestics works. It's freaky to know they've been using that stuff for quite some time now, not knowing how it works..

[ This Message was edited by: kensuguro on 2005-04-10 01:59 ]

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 6:09 pm

Thank you Hubird for this respect you always show to everybody, this is always so very nice to experience, it truly inspires me independently of being or not myself the person you are taking car of

About 100 years of discussion
I have nothing to do with those speculations and high level mental discussions, I am not even interested in them. For me this matter about “consciousness” it is not at all a personal view, and it has not born through reading philosophers or books in general, but inside myself, as an inborn need to understand life, and not even intellectually, but natural. You may think I am an intellectual, but I am not. Love is perhaps much older than the search for objectivity and consciousness, but nevertheless, the fact that the entire world is looking for it and has written thousands of books, and thousands of songs, I still be the one who, for the need of it, is going to fall in love, write a song and a book about love. This is just human nature, you cannot help it.

For me, the term consciousness is strictly joined to:

Goodwill
Bounty
Soulfulness
Sincerity
Reality
Health
Love
Creativity
Mercy
Compassion

And all other terms you may find in the dictionary, which have to do with dignity and good feelings in a human being. I actually think all goodness comes from the degree of consciousness a person may have.

Hey Ken

Self awareness, that sounds very interesting, and points to what I think myself. I’ll do a search for this guy, to read about his studies.

Post by **hubird** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 11:01 pm

that's what I said, you use the word consciousness in a normative way, the list says it

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 5:18 am

and it's highly subjective, which brings me back to one of my assumptions before, that you use those terms in a metaphoric way to express something else.
Consciousness is at least much 'nicer' than objectivity in context with the items on your list, regarding the 'sound' of the word, isn't it

is it the struggle between your good and your bad side that drives your literal excursions ?
all the Buddhas have an angry and a peaceful appearance, btw

cheers, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2005-04-11 06:20 ]

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:01 am

Consciousness for me is the difference between life and death.
Consciousness for me is the knowledge of, being aware of, what is happening around me. I cannot be conscious of what I don't know, for me it's non-existant: I can't interfere with or react to that either, nor will it give me any feeling for example. I can try to be more conscious by trying to know more.

Times of problems often increase consciousness. For example... working for a couple of days in Belfast in Northern Ireland, I noticed how everyone seems more involved, engaged, dedicated to what they do. They're not as [a]pathetic as people are here. They are very conscious of what is happening, and of how they deal with life. People do think there, and they do have opinions. They seem to live more than people do here, where our only problems are the bills in the mail. And who knows who's happier.

When I'm no longer aware of, and I no longer react to, what's happening around me, when I'm no longer conscious, I'm dead. No matter weither the heart in my body is still pumping or not, when I no longer react to anything they can put me 6 feet under. (Please give it a couple of days just to be sure

)

at0m.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=consciousness

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:03 am

Here I am going a step forward making everobody crazy about life, death, consciouness, and all those things… he he….

Yea, there I go… yea… get ready baby, oh yea, let swing… Shake it up! Shake it up! Shake it up! Baby! Uuuuuuuhhhhhhuuuuuuyyyyyyyyy!

Well, now that I feel better, I go to the point:

Essence, for me, is the very bottom line behind consciousness. I.e., consciousness derives from essence. In fact, objectivity is possible thanks to the capacity of being aware of, or being conscious, and what makes somebody to be conscious is his or her essence.

What does it me to me? Well, as I already said, if a person is more objective, it is because has more consciousness. And if somebody has more consciousness, it is because he has more essence within himself. What essence would come to be? Essence is a principle that some may call soul, others mind, others the inner “I”, etc. That’s it, I have come to the end of the scale

He!

Post by **garyb** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 11:59 am

please, i mean no disrespect(really!), but "so?"....

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 1:40 pm

Essence Garyb, Essence!

[ This Message was edited by: Nestor on 2005-04-11 14:41 ]

enumeratus · Post by **enumeratus** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 3:30 pm

"If you stand on the table you can touch the ceiling."

Post by **garyb** » Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:16 pm

essense is everywhere. why do you search so hard? it is common.

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Tue Apr 12, 2005 12:24 am

Why do you think I am searching hard? A thread about not judging people that transformed into something else, it is not necesarily a hard search. I enjoy it, as much as I posibly can... Of course, essence is everywere, am glad you see it too

Post by **garyb** » Tue Apr 12, 2005 2:11 am

Nestor · Post by **Nestor** » Wed Apr 13, 2005 8:09 pm

If you swallow a ceiling you are probably going to have a headache while looking the table