Moderator: Only_Humean
Maniacal Mongoose wrote:My PC is on the blink.No vid. then I post asking for vid. and "voila" vid. appears. Looks like I'll have to watch your clip Gibballoons, now that it's visibly available.
Maniacal Mongoose wrote:My PC is on the blink.No vid. then I post asking for vid. and "voila" vid. appears. Looks like I'll have to watch your clip Gibballoons, now that it's visibly available.
Amorphos wrote:I think the cosmic insignificance of humanity, shows the cosmic insignificance of a universe without humanity.
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:If humanity is insignificant, why does Consciousness find itself on this planet?
gib wrote:<snip>
We'll start with episode 1 of season 1 next time.
gib wrote:Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:If humanity is insignificant, why does Consciousness find itself on this planet?
Personally, I think consciousness is everywhere, but to me, that makes everything significant.
gib wrote:Amorphos wrote:I think the cosmic insignificance of humanity, shows the cosmic insignificance of a universe without humanity.
How shall I interpret this? Are you saying that the cosmos itself is insignificant when you remove humanity form the picture? And what if you didn't remove humanity? Would the cosmos then be significant even though humanity itself remains insignificant?
Personally, I think consciousness is everywhere, but to me, that makes everything significant.
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:Consciousness isn't everywhere, there is only One consciousness.
Amorphos wrote:well just saying that without the presence of the experiencer nothing is being experienced, and is at least in that sense is insignificant.
Amorphos wrote:Consciousness probably only exists where there is a 'projector', no?
gib wrote:Yes, Trixie, we've been over this before: you have your view of consciousness, I have mine.
So you mean that in order for something to be considered significant, it must be experienced as significant? Yes, this is very true.
Yes, which is everywhere.
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:You only have one consciousness. Yours is one, mine is one. These are the facts.
Amorphos wrote:Yes its almost like it doesn't exist or is in some way futile, pointless, ~ billions of galaxies or not.
Amorphos wrote:Wow really?!
I was thinking that you need the instrument. I am intrigued to know what you mean by that though?
I mean that I don't think of consciousness (i.e. qualia) as something that requires a functioning brain in order to be had. Consciousness (qualia) is something that comes with any physical system undergoing any kind of activity. The kind of activity it undergoes determines the quality felt in the quale. And whatever the quality, it will project as some aspect of a reality (experienced by the system in question) and will be meaningful to it.
Amorphos wrote:I should say thanks first, I don't get the show on the channel setup I have.
Amorphos wrote:This is going to sound mad but when I was a glue-sniffing young punk, the onlooker would see me as a dribbling wreck. However, I remember clearly that I could think if anything more intelligently than normal. So the brain is mush, and the intellect is enhanced!
Amorphos wrote:You see consciousness as 'qualia'? Does e.g. colour experience itself?
Amorphos wrote:ergo we can surely think of the experiencing thing as categorically different to the class of non-experiencing things i.e. all qualia, qualities and info.
Amorphos wrote:I think there is something else which communicates between categorically different things, and between one quality or qualia & another, ..and between those things and the experience. Info in terms of language, is not the same as physical information, but for us to know it, again there must be a thrid party communicative aspect to the equation.
Amorphos wrote:I don't know how the projection could be everywhere, but perhaps as physical info is talking to us in English - so to say, that could mean that every perspective point in existence is a projector. but that would infer an observer ~ experiencer, is also at every point?
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:What i dont get, is if they are all active projectors at the same time...then what arbitrary mechanism divides and localizes it to me, instead of you?
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:clearly, they are not all active at the same time, they are only potentially active, and one of them decides to be active at a time, ala in a priority queue, inside of another metatimespace in which it can go backwards and reactivate the others, or none at all, if it so chooses, rendering all of you nonsentients.
Drugs can perform either enhancement or degradation to the brain's functioning. Drugs are sometimes prescribed to enhance certain brain functions. Think about the effect caffeine has on the brain. It enhances thinking.
Being conscious of a color, feeling it, is part and parcel of the quale of color itself
The quale of red will feel itself as the existence of red
Ok, I appreciate your view. If you thought of all these things as separate--the qualia from consciousness from physical existence from info--then you would have to have some conduit in order for any one of these things to affect any other.
Yes, as "experience" is just a synonym of "quale",
but that's not to be confused with individuation at every point--where "individuation" means a separate being at every point--it still forms a seamless continuum. Individuation in the case of human beings is another story--it has centrally to do with knowledge (as I alluded to above).
Ultimate Philosophy 1001 wrote:you and me are in different locations of the spiritual timeline, connected through the physical metatimeline.
if i am not you in a past or future life, it is impossible for you to be sentient.
also, you got no evidence trees experience anything in order for us to forget our knowledge of being a tree.
Amorphos wrote:But my TV does have colour, and there is colour in the world which we are seeing, and yet those instances of colour are purely manifest of photonic light. I'd suggest that quale are manifest with respect to the given, and it doesn't matter if that is human or a device. ...they are part of the universe without [aside from] humans [and human experience].
Amorphos wrote:I think the quale are the thing between the experience/r and physical information. Going out on a limb, i'd add that the experiencer is equally affecting - upon quale and possibly/probably info too.
Amorphos wrote:When you say 'feel'? I would think it doesn't know or experience anything et al, it simply is.
Amorphos wrote:You get the physical information denoting red in e.g. that part of a rainbow, and that manifests the quality of redness.
Amorphos wrote:Ergo there is ultimately one thing which can become all the variety of things, and that oneness must manifest the connectivity where one thing forms into another and so forth.
Amorphos wrote:The 'thing' is informed by and informs all things. So you get photonic information which tells 'it' to manifest the quale 'red', and it does that on the TV screen and also in ones brain, and you see the red qualia.
Amorphos wrote:so what's on the TV screen and the rainbow?
Amorphos wrote:It seams that the cardinality is at best vague. ...but something makes things take shape and denotes limits e.g. of you/others, and there isn't just space.
Users browsing this forum: Peter Kropotkin