Thought is performed by thinking. Thoughts are of no material consequence until they are written down or expressed. When one thinks a thought, he is
merely thinking. Thinking is an action.
Now I might have to critique "thoughts" to better understand them.
What defines a material consequence?
Performances, agents, actions...I'm confused, really.
What carries out an action?
What is a performance?
A performance is the act of an agent performing an action.
That sounds about right.
from which things
are produced are called performances
So, for example:
Thinking, an act
from which thoughts
are produced, is a performance
... Thinking is a
No, wait, it's the other way around since you didn't say thinking was a performance. You said a thought was performed. And you said that thinking is
, which are produced from actions
, are called performances
, which is produced from thinking
, is called a performance
Is that right?
What kind of thing is a thought? I refrained from asking before since it looked like you still had to understand the nature of "thought".
But, is it immaterial or material? I believe you have not bluntly stated which one is the nature of thought, and that's understandable.
I'll give you time to respond so I don't continue digressing.
By necessity, if it is performed by the agent it is therefor an action. This is what I also believe of mind; even if the agent is unaware that he is
thinking, say in sleep or something, he is still performing the act of thinking, like digestion or breathing.
Involuntary actions and voluntary actions...
"Are you saying that the mind is an agent?"
No I am saying an agent is required to perform mind, that mind is an action.
What action would you say is mind?
"But what directs the body to perform?
If it is directed to perform, can it be said that there is an agent for the body?"
If we consider that everything within the body is of the body, we can say that the body is that agent. But then again, the body then requires many
elements for itself to perform.
What about thoughts? Would you say they are "of the body" too?
Would you say that agree that a thought can act as the agent since one can only ever think of their body as well as of the material world?
Maybe machines are agents of the actions they are designed to perform.
So the involuntary actions of the body are still owed to the agent, the body, despite the [other] agent, the [voluntary] body, performing other
actions at the same time - other actions that you might say you are aware of or are willingly performing.
Why is there a need for two agents, one involuntary and one voluntary?
Would this "double-agent" situation mean that thoughts (or the act of thinking?) can also be involuntary?
What are you trying to say with the latter portion (of the quote above)? Is it about considering bodily necessities (things that keep it functioning)
as "the body"?
When I think of an action, say running, I must imagine something performing it. So I am not really imagining an action called running, but something
moving its legs in a manner that is familiar to what we define as running.
Are you implying that actions cannot be thought-of, or imagined., that instead they may only be performed?
What is performance, an execution, etc?
There is an awareness in the body which may perform acts/tasks, and there is an unaware organic machine. Is there anything special between the two?
Are we just not aware of the other awareness, so that it is considered unaware?
Can you imagine an agent, just not an action?