Life as a manifestation of the universe

[fela fan]

Our self awareness is neccesarily embodied, it arises as a consequence of having a body. Read Antonio Damasio's "Descartes Error" and "The Feeling of What Happens".

This just sounds like a load of hot air bullshit. What the fuck does 'necessarily embodied' mean? Or are we supposed to read a book to find out more about this great snippet of information?

Because i can tell you, that having a body does not necessarily mean having self-awareness at all. Self-awareness needs more conditions than the mere presence of a body to be in existence. Unless you're saying that one cannot have self-awareness without a body, in which case this is still bullshit because the ant or the panda or the kangaroo have bodies, but no self-awareness.

 

[fela fan]

Consciousness is interpretation. Put it another way, we cannot help but interpret our situation, that's what it means to be conscious. This is why we are condemned to be free, for to be conscious is to interpret the world.

And yeah, I think consciousness "just happens" ~ you can't see a thought coming, or awareness arising. These things just happen if you're conscious.

So no, consciousness isn't omnipresent and separate from living bodies. Not in my world, anyway; I've never encountered a disembodied consciousness. Has anyone? I know lots of people believe in ghosts and spirits and the like, but all the same, I reckon that's a mistaken belief. Truth is, the only conscious things any of us have ever met, except in our dreams, are other conscious bodies.

Allow me the opportunity to pull this post apart. You of course can return the compliment, if you can...

If consciousness IS interpretation, then why the two entirely separate words? But either way, one can be conscious and not at all in the mode of interpreting something or things. I would grant though that if we are to interpret then we first need consciousness to do so.

And being condemned to be free sounds like an oxymoron to me. I think people are condemned to turn their back on freedom. Afraid of responsibility and maturity.

When you say, "consciousness just happens", this is the subconscious imposing itself on the part of the brain that likes to identify itself as the self. What many commentators call the 'ego'. Your 'consciousness just happens' is the ego making itself known.

I'll not go into what your dreams are.

 

[butchersapron]

So when are you going to pull massive-brain Jonti's post apart?

edit:

If consciousness IS interpretation, then why the two entirely separate words?

absolute 100% solid gold genius

 

[danny la rouge]

What the fuck does 'necessarily embodied' mean?

Exactly what it says.

I sometimes wonder about language. The phrase 'necessarily embodied', especially given the context of the discussion, seems to me concise, precise, understandable, and coherent. The OP, however, just seems like a haphazard collection of words. The syntax is indecipherable.

Because i can tell you, that having a body does not necessarily mean having self-awareness at all.

The phrase 'necessarily embodied' means the opposite of this, though. It doesn't mean if you have a body you must have self awareness; it means if you have self awareness, you must have a body.

 

[fela fan]

Defining "consiousness" is much harder. I would best describe it as an unseen collective force of knowledge. It really depends whether you think that consciousness is something that just happens or is omnipresent and separate from living life.

Your definition of consciousness seems to me a definition more to do with 'subconsciousness'.

And i would say that consciousness is not omnipresent (plenty of people spend plenty of time being without consciousness, eg in crowd situations), and nor is it something that just happens, and nor is it separate from living life.

Consciousness is being in the state of the present moment, and precedes and makes possible awareness. Consciousness is grounded in the present moment, ie, is completely time-unrelated. Consciousness is a manifestation of the universe. Life is not a manifestation of the universe. After all, how do you account for the living dead?!

 

[Purdie]

Consciousness is

I've never encountered a disembodied consciousness. Has anyone?

Sort of had this really weird experience once where time seemed to stand still yet everything moved and that lasted for about minute

I can't even begin to explain what it was like other than it felt like a total detachment.

 

[fela fan]

Exactly what it says.

I sometimes wonder about language. The phrase 'necessarily embodied', especially given the context of the discussion, seems to me concise, precise, understandable, and coherent. The OP, however, just seems like a haphazard collection of words. The syntax is indecipherable.


The phrase 'necessarily embodied' means the opposite of this, though. It doesn't mean if you have a body you must have self awareness; it means if you have self awareness, you must have a body.

Well, thank you for the definition. But i needed someone to define it to let me understand the term. What it exactly says it is is not clear, at least to me.

And i agree with that definition. Nice to learn a new term, and to be able to agree with it.

 

[danny la rouge]

After all, how do you account for the living dead?!

Somebody pinch me.

 

[fela fan]

So when are you going to pull massive-brain Jonti's post apart?

Up to you mate. If i've not done it yet, then that's fine, it's your perception and consciousness and awareness that defines what i've done.

 

[danny la rouge]

What it exactly says it is is not clear, at least to me.

Necessarily. Of necessity. Embodied. Having a body.

 

[fela fan]

Somebody pinch me.

Why not use language to make yourself understood rather than talk in riddles. Explain your problem with that phrase instead of appealing to other forces. You did a good job on making clear a term i didn't know. What's wrong with this phrase i used?

 

[fela fan]

Necessarily. Of necessity. Embodied. Having a body.

Yeah, look mate, i can decipher dictionaries, but they don't create a full conceptual meaning. You and others appear to be talking about a chunk of language that already has a meaning of its own. And because it doesn't have automatic full contextual meaning to me, means either i'm slow and stupid, or it's just not clear to those who have yet to know about the term. It may be clear to you, but don't be assuming that means it's clear to all and sundry.

In fact, your description of what it actually does mean is simply not contained within the two words that make up the term.

 

[danny la rouge]

What's wrong with this phrase i used?

You said:

After all, how do you account for the living dead?!

This appears to me to be taking for granted the notion that the living dead exist, and that all that has to be done is account for that existence. Living dead, yes?

 

[kyser_soze]

Why not use language to make yourself understood rather than talk in riddles. Explain your problem with that phrase instead of appealing to other forces. You did a good job on making clear a term i didn't know. What's wrong with this phrase i used?

After all, how do you account for the living dead?!

WTF? Are you talking about zombies? Vampires (who are technically ab-dead)?

If you can't work out why, after saying the living dead exist, why danny said 'somebody pinch me' you really need to read what you've written...

 

[kyser_soze]

Yeah, look mate, i can decipher dictionaries, but they don't create a full conceptual meaning. You and others appear to be talking about a chunk of language that already has a meaning of its own. And because it doesn't have automatic full contextual meaning to me, means either i'm slow and stupid, or it's just not clear to those who have yet to know about the term. It may be clear to you, but don't be assuming that means it's clear to all and sundry.

In fact, your description of what it actually does mean is simply not contained within the two words that make up the term.

I'd not heard the term before but was able to work out that it meant in order to have conciousness it's necessary to have a body.

 

[butchersapron]

You said:

After all, how do you account for the living dead?!

This appears to me to be taking for granted the notion that the living dead exist, and that all that has to be done is account for that existence. Living dead, yes?

What's more - living and dead - they're two entirely seperate words!!!

 

[kyser_soze]

Yeah, but they could mean exactly the same thing...

 

[danny la rouge]

In fact, your description of what it actually does mean is simply not contained within the two words that make up the term.

The term is just the two words. I worked out what it meant from the meaning of the two words. As far as I know it has no technical meaning other than that derived from the two constituent words. So, the meaning is contained within those two words; that's how I knew what Blagsta meant.

 

[fela fan]

You said:

After all, how do you account for the living dead?!

This appears to me to be taking for granted the notion that the living dead exist, and that all that has to be done is account for that existence. Living dead, yes?

Well, it seems we have different understandings of this term. When i used the 'living dead', i'm referring to those who live their lives largely in a state of non-consciousness, non-awareness. They are alive physically, their hearts beat, their bodies are phsyiologically living, but their minds are not.

 

[fela fan]

I'd not heard the term before but was able to work out that it meant in order to have conciousness it's necessary to have a body.

Well done.

 

[Blagsta]

This just sounds like a load of hot air bullshit. What the fuck does 'necessarily embodied' mean? Or are we supposed to read a book to find out more about this great snippet of information?

Because i can tell you, that having a body does not necessarily mean having self-awareness at all. Self-awareness needs more conditions than the mere presence of a body to be in existence. Unless you're saying that one cannot have self-awareness without a body, in which case this is still bullshit because the ant or the panda or the kangaroo have bodies, but no self-awareness.

you're thick

 

[Blagsta]

Exactly what it says.

I sometimes wonder about language. The phrase 'necessarily embodied', especially given the context of the discussion, seems to me concise, precise, understandable, and coherent. The OP, however, just seems like a haphazard collection of words. The syntax is indecipherable.


The phrase 'necessarily embodied' means the opposite of this, though. It doesn't mean if you have a body you must have self awareness; it means if you have self awareness, you must have a body.

you're not

 

[fela fan]

What's more - living and dead - they're two entirely seperate words!!!

Yes, more intelligence being displayed on this thread. Two words yes, but one chunk. Chunk as in one meaning, but more than one word. As in idioms that are normally more than two words even, but referring to a conceptual meaning.

To and fro. Look at that mate, three words, but one meaning. Hence the need for 'chunk' to describe vocabulary these days. Even 'fuck off' has two words, but one conceptual meaning...

 

[butchersapron]

Yes, more intelligence being displayed on this thread. Two words yes, but one chunk. Chunk as in one meaning, but more than one word. As in idioms that are normally more than two words even, but referring to a conceptual meaning.

To and fro. Look at that mate, three words, but one meaning. Hence the need for 'chunk' to describe vocabulary these days. Even 'fuck off' has two words, but one conceptual meaning...

If consciousness IS interpretation, then why the two entirely separate words?

Like that eh?

 

[Fruitloop]

linguistics facepalm

 

[IMR]

Well, it seems we have different understandings of this term. When i used the 'living dead', i'm referring to those who live their lives largely in a state of non-consciousness, non-awareness. They are alive physically, their hearts beat, their bodies are phsyiologically living, but their minds are not.

As in people in long-term comas hooked up to life support machines. There can't be very many of them worldwide though, bit of a fringe example tbh.

 

[fela fan]

you're thick

Would you reckon to have enough intelligence to recognise the difference between me actually being 'thick' and your perception that i am 'thick'?

For the latter is spot on, totally correct, assuming you mean what you say.

Whereas the former is of course totally wrong. You should use language more accurately if you want to make a decent point. It is also noted that you had nothing to say by way of reply to the actual post, but rather just wished to display your disregard for other people's opinions.

What a grand debater you display yourself to be.

 

[fela fan]

Like that eh?

No, not like that.

 

[kyser_soze]

Yes, more intelligence being displayed on this thread. Two words yes, but one chunk. Chunk as in one meaning, but more than one word. As in idioms that are normally more than two words even, but referring to a conceptual meaning.

To and fro. Look at that mate, three words, but one meaning. Hence the need for 'chunk' to describe vocabulary these days. Even 'fuck off' has two words, but one conceptual meaning...

Wut?

 

[butchersapron]

Yes!

Seriously - what's wrong with you fela? It's relentless, this stupidity. And it's so unaware.