Consciousness Doesn't Exist.

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbake
Are you trying to tell me that the color blue does not exist? Because that seems to be what you are basing your argument on. I think that deciding whether or not something is conscious based on parts of speech is silly.


The question is: Is one conscious because of his existence or because of consciousness? Consciousness, being something abstractly conceived by the brain, isn't the reason we are conscious. Therefore, no "I Think therefore I am." But rather I am, Therefore I think.




posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by 001ggg100
I understand that, but that is not the point... You are using a word that does not begin to describe the concept, to validate your belief... in short, you are splitting hairs. I only used that example to show the flaw in your argument. It is unfair to excuse an idea or concept because the words used to presently describe are weak.


To me it is not unfair, but necessary. There was no flaw in my argument either. We are talking about unfathomable things, we should at least try our best to fathom them.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne

Originally posted by darkbake
Are you trying to tell me that the color blue does not exist? Because that seems to be what you are basing your argument on. I think that deciding whether or not something is conscious based on parts of speech is silly.


The question is: Is one conscious because of his existence or because of consciousness? Consciousness, being something abstractly conceived by the brain, isn't the reason we are conscious. Therefore, no "I Think therefore I am." But rather I am, Therefore I think.


I just made an account on ATS because it was a conscious decision to do so based on your thread. Other bodily functions that are necessary and consciously unavoidable, do not apply.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
This is pedantic.

The article basically argues that 'consciousness" doesnt exist solely based on wording.

Basically, it is someone trying to make themself feel smart by arguing semantics.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne]

But my body and not my consciousness read and smell and taste. Consciousness is abstract because it represents an idea only.


Can you actually read without consciousness?

That doesn't include staring at a book for an hour in class.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
This is pedantic.

The article basically argues that 'consciousness" doesnt exist solely based on wording.

Basically, it is someone trying to make themself feel smart by arguing semantics.


Pedantic enough to deserve a response from you. I appreciate your grace and effort.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne]

But my body and not my consciousness read and smell and taste. Consciousness is abstract because it represents an idea only.


Can you actually read without consciousness?

That doesn't include staring at a book for an hour in class.


You're not quite understanding. Is something conscious because of consciousness or because they exist?



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
This is pedantic.

The article basically argues that 'consciousness" doesnt exist solely based on wording.

Basically, it is someone trying to make themself feel smart by arguing semantics.


Pedantic enough to deserve a response from you. I appreciate your grace and effort.


No problem. It is absolutely pedantic, and has no real basis whatsoever.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 


I mean ummm.. thank you for your opinion?


edit on 15-7-2012 by TheSubversiveOne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
You are not trying to fathom it... You are discarding it because the word does not fit. You are basically saying hey, the concept of a consciousness driving your brain is all wrong because the word is an abstract noun.........? How do you come to your conclusion that consciousness is brain created via the wording used to describe it?



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 001ggg100
You are not trying to fathom it... You are discarding it because the word does not fit. You are basically saying hey, the concept of a consciousness driving your brain is all wrong because the word is an abstract noun.........? How do you come to your conclusion that consciousness is brain created via the wording used to describe it?


Yes, because I believe it is the other way around and the brain is driving consciousness. We use words to describe things and events, if those words contradict, that means it is possible the ideas contradict. An abstract noun is something that has no basis in reality whatsoever, but exists only as an idea. Before we consider them real, we should at least see if there is a more simple reason. I am only scrutinizing an idea. No harm, no foul.
edit on 15-7-2012 by TheSubversiveOne because: spelling



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne

Originally posted by darkbake
Are you trying to tell me that the color blue does not exist? Because that seems to be what you are basing your argument on. I think that deciding whether or not something is conscious based on parts of speech is silly.


The question is: Is one conscious because of his existence or because of consciousness? Consciousness, being something abstractly conceived by the brain, isn't the reason we are conscious. Therefore, no "I Think therefore I am." But rather I am, Therefore I think.


Ah, now you are starting to make sense. That is a good point, consciousness isn't a valid reason for being conscious. There is something else going on.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
OP, we must first define what your meaning of "consciousness" is, because no scientist will ever argue the fact that consciousness exists.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSubversiveOne
 


L
L

spoken like a true sith



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Again, words are fallible... Just because words contradict an idea does not mean the idea is flawed... You took a leap of faith... Until a better word is conjured up to describe this abstract idea, we're stuck with it.

Just to clarify if you would permit me... You are stating that conscious(ness) is a biological process of the brain and that there is nothing too the idea that conscious(ness) might exist outside the body?

I only ask, as I want to make sure I do not misunderstand your point of view...



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
Therefore, no "I Think therefore I am." But rather I am, Therefore I think.


"I think therefore I am" is not meant to be interpreted as a cause and effect. It simply means "I am conscious, therefore I can not doubt my existence"
edit on 7-15-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by 001ggg100
Again, words are fallible... Just because words contradict an idea does not mean the idea is flawed... You took a leap of faith... Until a better word is conjured up to describe this abstract idea, we're stuck with it.

Just to clarify if you would permit me... You are stating that conscious(ness) is a biological process of the brain and that there is nothing too the idea that conscious(ness) might exist outside the body?

I only ask, as I want to make sure I do not misunderstand your point of view...


Rather, a thing is conscious due to it's biological process, and consciousness, as an entity, doesn't exist, nor does it make one conscious.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by 001ggg100
 

Exactly what I was thinking,
Happy(ness) is an emotion, Forgetful(ness) is and action. Conscious(ness) is neather an action or an emotion, it comes before these. I don`t think describing it like them does it justice.
"We cannot solve a problem using the same consciousness as that which created it" -Einstein.
We cannot describe consciousness until we can observe it, not our own individual consciousness but someone elses, and that is impossible in our 3D realm.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ranong
reply to post by 001ggg100
 

Exactly what I was thinking,
Happy(ness) is an emotion, Forgetful(ness) is and action. Conscious(ness) is neather an action or an emotion, it comes before these. I don`t think describing it like them does it justice.
"We cannot solve a problem using the same consciousness as that which created it" -Einstein.
We cannot describe consciousness until we can observe it, not our own individual consciousness but someone elses, and that is impossible in our 3D realm.




Happiness is rather a state of being happy. Forgetfulness is rather a state of being forgetful. Happiness does not make one happy, nor is it an entity. Forgetfulness doesn't make one forgetful, nor is it an entity. Consciousness does not make one conscious, nor is it an entity.
edit on 15-7-2012 by TheSubversiveOne because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
13
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join