Jump to content






- - - - -

Consciousness

Posted by pagetheoracle, 07 January 2015 · 1688711 views

Consciousness is stopping and examining what you've done. Therefore motion is unconscious / unconsciousness (transmission rather than reception). Motion equals self and consciousness equals lack of motion / emotion (stillness and silence) - a state where we stop 'being' ourselves and become aware of others / other things in our environment instead.




No. Consciousness is an ongoing awareness of what you are doing, with possible excursions into reviews of what you have done, or what you might do in future. In no sense does it require stopping what you are currently doing.

 

Motion of what equals self? When I used to run I was in motion and I was conscious of many aspects of my physiology and my surroundings.

 

In short, your definition of consciouness fails to match the reality of consciousness in almost every way.

  • Quote

No. Consciousness is an ongoing awareness of what you are doing, with possible excursions into reviews of what you have done, or what you might do in future. In no sense does it require stopping what you are currently doing.

 

Motion of what equals self? When I used to run I was in motion and I was conscious of many aspects of my physiology and my surroundings.

 

In short, your definition of consciouness fails to match the reality of consciousness in almost every way.

Because you were moving too fast without stopping and reviewing what you'd done (your words not mine), you missed out the 'S' in consciousness. 

 

Motion of the self equals the self - living energy. 

 

Next time you run take a film camera or your cellphone and then put the results here to show how clear they are compared with still camera shots or have people on your route take shots of various locations, then let them ask you questions about what you say, you saw and compare it to what they say they saw.  In the UK there was an experiment carried on live TV where a fake robbery occurred.  The witnesses were all asked about what happened and their stories failed to correspond with the reality of events.  I think you'll display the same lack of correct evidence because of all the events that you say are happening in your body, distracting your attention from the outside world.

 

Did I rattle you with something I said earlier, elsewhere?  I know I did Raccoon and apologized for it.  Is this what is happening here?  Is it because I pointed out little niggling points about your posts or didn't you want people to know about you being a lone moderator over Christmas because it embarrassed you?  If I could have messaged you this wouldn't have happened but that is not my fault is it?  Sorry anyway if any of this is the cause.

  • Quote

Once again you resort to a strawman argument and fail to address the central points:

 

1. No one is denying that ones focus of ones attention varies.

2. Consciousness demonstrably is present when one is in motion. You asser this is not true. Your assertion is balderdash.

 

Please stop assuming that an attack on your ideas is somehow based on an emotional reaction: it is based on a distaste for poorly conceived waffle.

  • Quote

In degree it is less than when one is still or why does science rely so much on measurement and how much of that is carried while the object of study is in motion?  You don't look through telescopes or microscopes while you are in motion do you?  Seismographs measure earthquake motion but are they on the back of a truck, rushing to the scene of a quake?  Is the Hadron Collider in motion? No but it measures motion.  Does the Hubble Telescope take motion pictures of the universe or 'still' pictures (you may know different on that)?  What scientific measurement and what percent are based on the measuring device moving in relation to the subject studied 'as a deliberate act?'

 

When you were at school did your teachers have you sitting at a desk or running around the room, unless this was sport based exercise or manual studies like woodwork (even in science classes in my time, you had to sit at a desk and take notes)?  Do you read a book while running or look at a computer screen on the move?  No because the images are blurred and blurring comes from motion.

 

Isn't 'distaste for poorly conceived waffle' an emotional response, rather than a logical attack upon my points? Not to mention the use of 'balderdash' which, forgive me, is not any scientific measurement that I know of.

 

Glad you agree about point 1.  Cannot disagree that is present in motion but how strong if you are totally knackered after a run and you are breathless?  Also as I pointed out, how much are you aware of the outside world when in this condition?  Action destroys the ability to turn inwards and examine things in depth.  How many great thinkers were sportsmen?  We acknowledge the prowess of athletes but they react to situations and great thinkers don't as that is not their area of specialization.

 

Personally I think you are proving my point over and over again, in this thread and my 'Forgive Them Lord' thread too (see 'Impact' in that thread). CraigD corrects me in the same way a lady at the National Farming Union in The UK corrected me about an idea I had, which I thought would improve the Lambing season.  Both left me feeling unrattled but aware that I was either wrong in my assumption or had missed vital evidence.  Neither used emotional language and neither have some of the other moderators, whether they agreed with me or not on some points I raised.  When they have or like the incidents where Turtle called me names, that is not a calm, rational discussion but childish behaviour aimed at shutting me up, rather than thinking about the arguments themselves.  I can't stop anyone doing that - not the Muslims who shot the cartoonists in Paris or even sometimes myself when I lose it, hence my going the first time Turtle attacked me by name calling (the second time I stayed my ground and continued the argument, hence this mixed argument/discussion with you). 

  • Quote

I did ask for permission to critque your writing robustly. You agreed. I understand your comments here to be revocation of that permission. I shall not trouble you again.

  • Quote

Yes I did agree but you're right things are getting too hot to handle on both sides, which is a good time to bow out as nothing is being achieved.

  • Quote

There is absolutely no heat from my side and I apologise if I gave that impression. I think your arguments are flawed and I have said so. You disagree. So, we shall follow the cliche and agree to disagree.

  • Quote

or Sign In

January 2018

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
1415161718 19 20
21222324252627
28293031   

Recent Comments

Tags

    Categories

    Twitter