What is ' consciousness ' ?

[Thomas123]

This word appears to be at the centre of many discussions on this forum. It also appears to mean different things to different people and, therein lies the root of our miscommunication. What range and definement do you attribute to, ' consciousness ' ?

Is there an external consciousness in the world?. Can I tune into a shared consciousness. I am listening to Prime Minister's Question Time, ....is Boris tuned into a universal human consciousness as he delivers his address. Is his brain working ,simultaneously and in tandem with my own consciousness and with that of others?

[brunumb]

I am of the opinion that those who side with materialism [this is not a Creation - there is not a Creator] are fearful to 'go there' in relation to "This is a Creation and [by implication] there is a Creator", because it primarily involves imagination and in that materialists in general seem afraid.

The imagination is involved in creating all works of fiction, and no matter how real those creations may appear, they are still just imaginary. This materialist is not afraid of the imagination, only those who try to sell the imaginary as reality. So far we have nothing compelling to suggest that living in a simulation or a created world is anything more than a fanciful proposition.

[brunumb]

One can - using the minds eye to project on the minds screen [imagination] - see that it could well be probable that in terms of the materialist position and accompanying parameters that long before life on earth became part of this reality, the machinery [The Universe] had already produced consciousness and since the machinery is still running and likely to run for way longer than it currently has already existed, that the consciousness byproduct will actively remain and continue 'becoming' more and more knowledgeable and able to achieve more and more amazing things.

One can also see using the mind's eye that not only is this scenario not probable but it is also not possible.

[William]

I am of the opinion that those who side with materialism [this is not a Creation - there is not a Creator] are fearful to 'go there' in relation to "This is a Creation and [by implication] there is a Creator", because it primarily involves imagination and in that materialists in general seem afraid.

I'm glad you prefaced this unsupportable claim with the phrase, "I am of the opinion." It alerts readers to the fact that you have presented no evidence to support it and that it has no value in a debate sub-forum.
Tcg

When it comes to answers in relation to the OP Question [What is ' consciousness ' ?] all that can be offered is opinion. If you are suggesting the the question itself is not something one can debate, I agree.

Otherwise I see no particular [logical] reason for you comment. It is meaningless in context.

[William]

I am of the opinion that those who side with materialism [this is not a Creation - there is not a Creator] are fearful to 'go there' in relation to "This is a Creation and [by implication] there is a Creator", because it primarily involves imagination and in that materialists in general seem afraid.

The imagination is involved in creating all works of fiction, and no matter how real those creations may appear, they are still just imaginary. This materialist is not afraid of the imagination, only those who try to sell the imaginary as reality. So far we have nothing compelling to suggest that living in a simulation or a created world is anything more than a fanciful proposition.

On the contrary, there is plenty of reason supporting that the evidence we do have points to the logical explanation it is indeed a simulation we are currently experiencing.
The imagination is simply the device we have to use in order to place the pieces together to form the picture on the screens of our minds.

The real problem [for materialists] is that it [the picture projected] implies a Creator. Such as, materialism is dead in the water. Something materialist naturally enough fear.

[William]

One can - using the minds eye to project on the minds screen [imagination] - see that it could well be probable that in terms of the materialist position and accompanying parameters that long before life on earth became part of this reality, the machinery [The Universe] had already produced consciousness and since the machinery is still running and likely to run for way longer than it currently has already existed, that the consciousness byproduct will actively remain and continue 'becoming' more and more knowledgeable and able to achieve more and more amazing things.

One can also see using the mind's eye that not only is this scenario not probable but it is also not possible.

Is that a claim? At least I have mapped out [in many threads] how the pieces fit together logically. So far you have just made a statement which looks like a claim but is not accompanied by any examples whatsoever. Should one simply accept your statement as valid?

I don't think so.

If your statement is simply opinion, that is fine...

[William]

Deleted double post

[Thomas123]

William Post 4

"I understand consciousness to being that which is - even at a very basic level - able to perceive itself as existing - as being - as the mechanism enabling self awareness.

Often that equates to activity [movement] which can easily enough be explained as motivated by the need for self preservation [survival].

Other words used which I consider the same are 'spirit' 'essence' and the like.

I understand that consciousness is the only real 'thing' but is not a thing as an object is a thing. It is what defines objects. It is what experiences objects. It is not a thing we have [like a body] but is what we are."

Thomas123

I applaud William, for attempting to really explain consciousness, from his perspective. Another contributor to the forum, Swami, has some very interesting ideas on this entity as well. We know consciousness is a discernable phenomena ,so we should ,in theory ,have a relatively tight consensual perception of what it is.

Thinking about thinking is a little uneasing, and it can become circular and enclosed as it proceeds. I watch the human world collectively thinking, by trawling through the variety of written material on our collective consciousness, ie our internet. If I was an extra terrestrial capable of accessing this material, I would then know, everything there is to know about us. This also suggests that we do in fact know ourselves ,very well but that we refuse to really engage with the logical consequences of this internet, self-expose . We see no limits to ourselves despite looking at our internet biography.

An extraterrestrial would also observe,from a forensic analysis of our internet, our attitude and perception to and of, other aspects of our shared life experience. They would recognise an ambiguity of emotional engagement with most aspects of the life and infrastructure of this planet. They would see us keep dogs as pets while we simultaneously poison rats. They would observe our dependence on water while considering the toxins we flush down our sinks and toilets.

This is not a detoured agenda ,on my part here. The point is that our stream of consciousness, that is our internet, is, if it is anything, confusing, fractured, illogically emotive, and subjectively limited. Is this the reason that we do not appear to be able to 'pin down' what consciousness is. Well done William, for making an honest and logical attempt!

[brunumb]

On the contrary, there is plenty of reason supporting that the evidence we do have points to the logical explanation it is indeed a simulation we are currently experiencing.
The imagination is simply the device we have to use in order to place the pieces together to form the picture on the screens of our minds.

Apart from a religion forum, where might one peruse your theory in detail? Perhaps you should submit your theory for publication and peer review if it is indeed so compelling. After that, keep an eye on the letterbox for notification of your Nobel prize.

[Thomas123]

What is consciousness?

It has taken millions of years for conscious life to evolve. This evolvement originates in an infintizimally small manifestation of awareness in an infintizimally small collection of matter. This pot has been stirred by ,gravity, atmosphere, weather, etc, etc..to ensure that the process, once activated ,would continue to evolve. This is exactly what has happened.
Our consciousness is the culmination of our internal awarenesses of external abrasions and contacts. There is no planning or creativity to this that was not existent in the infrastructure and ongoing dynamics of this planet as life began its journey into self awareness. We became what we are because of where we are.

The human modern 'consciousness' appears to be heading off on an anomalous tangent from it's original essence and purpose( the steering system of a primate). It is as if we have tipped across a watershed on to a new potential of consciousness that is as likely to be cannibalistic as it is to be wonderful.
I will explore this more ,later on, and I thank all who contribute their ideas to this topic.

[Thomas123]

We all live in a physical world.
Action creates it's own narrative.
It is a narrative of consequence and progression.


"We are, therefore, we think!"

When we accept the hierarchy of physical being over consciousness we can then, properly consider the potentials of our current evolved human awareness. We have a consciousness that has become deviant from usual physical stimulation and prompting. This is as potentially dangerous and dehabilitating as it can become a cause for wonderment and innovation.