Consciousness
- Thread starter Darkparagon
- Start date
You mean to say when does consciousness arise? - I suggest you read some Carl Jung, or some eastern philosophy.
Consciousness arises when one thinks about things. When one is pondering superficial ideas and the like. Sometimes great things happen when people think. But most of the time it is pretty selfcentered bullshit. I suggest you stay away from thought to be honest.
There are apparently different levels or modes of consciousness. Some people try to er.. Describe these layers/modes: Timothy Leary for one, and many other hallucinogenic users.
I think i've covered what it is: it is thought.
How do we know it? Simple we hear a little voice inside our head that tells us something. It dictates an idea you are thinking aloud in the hollow head we all have
Consciousness arises when one thinks about things. When one is pondering superficial ideas and the like. Sometimes great things happen when people think. But most of the time it is pretty selfcentered bullshit. I suggest you stay away from thought to be honest.
There are apparently different levels or modes of consciousness. Some people try to er.. Describe these layers/modes: Timothy Leary for one, and many other hallucinogenic users.
I think i've covered what it is: it is thought.
How do we know it? Simple we hear a little voice inside our head that tells us something. It dictates an idea you are thinking aloud in the hollow head we all have
[quote name='Darkparagon']So, consciousness. What is it and how do we know it?
I was having a decussion with someone about abortion, and one of the main topics which often came up was this topic of consciousness. The key focus been on when it begins. How can we know for sure when that exactly is?
Views?[/QUOTE]
Je pense donc je suis.
We can not know exactly when a connsciousness develops, but if we go by Decartes' "I think therefore I am" theory it is impossible for a fetus to have a consciousness when the brain hasn't been properly developed.
How do we know what point a fetus develops thought is another matter entirely. When it comes down to abortion there's really no arguement that can definitely say "it isn't alive/conciouss yet so it doesn't matter" at best you can only say morally there's no apparent difference when an abortion takes place, practically and emotionally there's a huge difference. Which grows even bigger after the child is born.
The "Pro Life" people (most arrogant and pretentious group of all time) compare abortion to murder, and morally they may have a point (in so far that all morality is a social creation) but practically their arguement is incredibly flawed. A fetus doesn't even have a brain in the first few weeks of the pregnacny, much less a functional brain which can take months to develop. There isn't even any registered brain activity (brain waves) coming from the fetus until the 6th week.
If you from that can say that Abortion isn't "murder", "wrong", "evil", whatever the hell people keep arguing about, is another matter entirely unfortunately.
I was having a decussion with someone about abortion, and one of the main topics which often came up was this topic of consciousness. The key focus been on when it begins. How can we know for sure when that exactly is?
Views?[/QUOTE]
Je pense donc je suis.
We can not know exactly when a connsciousness develops, but if we go by Decartes' "I think therefore I am" theory it is impossible for a fetus to have a consciousness when the brain hasn't been properly developed.
How do we know what point a fetus develops thought is another matter entirely. When it comes down to abortion there's really no arguement that can definitely say "it isn't alive/conciouss yet so it doesn't matter" at best you can only say morally there's no apparent difference when an abortion takes place, practically and emotionally there's a huge difference. Which grows even bigger after the child is born.
The "Pro Life" people (most arrogant and pretentious group of all time) compare abortion to murder, and morally they may have a point (in so far that all morality is a social creation) but practically their arguement is incredibly flawed. A fetus doesn't even have a brain in the first few weeks of the pregnacny, much less a functional brain which can take months to develop. There isn't even any registered brain activity (brain waves) coming from the fetus until the 6th week.
If you from that can say that Abortion isn't "murder", "wrong", "evil", whatever the hell people keep arguing about, is another matter entirely unfortunately.
Although when I say it is thought I will contradict myself here.
Can consciousness be found in anything; say a cat for example? Can it know what it is doing? The choices a cat makes can't purely be instinct as cats meow when hungry, consciously acknowledging that they register somewhere a thought that they are hungry, or they purr when they are happy...
Or a dog for example which can bark and wag it's tail or even move it's paws when it is asleep registering that it is dreaming...
Could a plant possibly have consciousness? Choosing to "eat" through photosynthesis? Or grow independent arms/branches that move/grow too the best area of sunlight...
Can consciousness be found in anything; say a cat for example? Can it know what it is doing? The choices a cat makes can't purely be instinct as cats meow when hungry, consciously acknowledging that they register somewhere a thought that they are hungry, or they purr when they are happy...
Or a dog for example which can bark and wag it's tail or even move it's paws when it is asleep registering that it is dreaming...
Could a plant possibly have consciousness? Choosing to "eat" through photosynthesis? Or grow independent arms/branches that move/grow too the best area of sunlight...
Its not just thinking. Animals think as well to some extend. Consciousness is sort of like Meta thinking. Being able to think over thinking. To understand why you do something, why you feel in a certain way, why you behave in a certain way and why you think in a certain way. You can rationalize yourself, and everything you do.
An animal just is, it doesnt ponder about the meaning of life or whatever. It exists because it was born, it will follow its biological needs like eating and sex and then it will at some point die. A human does all those things, but is aware of them, knows why he is doing it.
As for why it is like that, well, thank our super developed brain. And relating that to abortion, they can actually link parts of your consciousness to certain brain areas, and that makes it safe to say that when you abort within a certain amount of time, you abort something that has no brain, and therefor no consciousness.
An animal just is, it doesnt ponder about the meaning of life or whatever. It exists because it was born, it will follow its biological needs like eating and sex and then it will at some point die. A human does all those things, but is aware of them, knows why he is doing it.
As for why it is like that, well, thank our super developed brain. And relating that to abortion, they can actually link parts of your consciousness to certain brain areas, and that makes it safe to say that when you abort within a certain amount of time, you abort something that has no brain, and therefor no consciousness.
[quote name='-lexus-' timestamp='1306758626' post='141220']
Its not just thinking. Animals think as well to some extend. Consciousness is sort of like Meta thinking. Being able to think over thinking. To understand why you do something, why you feel in a certain way, why you behave in a certain way and why you think in a certain way. You can rationalize yourself, and everything you do.
An animal just is, it doesnt ponder about the meaning of life or whatever. It exists because it was born, it will follow its biological needs like eating and sex and then it will at some point die. A human does all those things, but is aware of them, knows why he is doing it.
As for why it is like that, well, thank our super developed brain. And relating that to abortion, they can actually link parts of your consciousness to certain brain areas, and that makes it safe to say that when you abort within a certain amount of time, you abort something that has no brain, and therefor no consciousness.
[/quote]Exactly this. But Animals, unlike humans, respond just to superficial stimulus -- a primitive way of thinking.
Some scientist did a funny test using turkies, I am sure you know this one. The turkey didn't spend a minute to think that's it is copulating a dead turkey carcass, but more it does, the more depressed it looks -- it's mate is not isn't responding. Took the turkey a while to think that.
Human was once the same, responding via instinct to outside stimuli -- but human, amazingly, using it's already developed tools(eyes, hands and etc.), this primitive human was able to distinguish, quick to remember patterns and learn new techniques. Just how cubs learn hunting from their Mother, and the lions themselves know when and where they will find a hunt. Or some birds learned to crack nuts, or mice find their way around a maze(driven by instinct though, following food). Humans do just that, except we apply differently.
Now this was passed down from generation to generation -- breeding the best of thinkers. Human's ability to grasp new information. This is what lead to consciousness -- the cognitive ability to think, learn and remember. Not a moment pass without thinking.
It has nothing to do with spirit or anything, as with people with retarded mental growth and post-injury patients shows symptoms of slow learning new patterns and remembering old things for a reason - their brain is damaged. It just cannot handle the influx of information, or just cannot process it.
I am pretty sure you know the difference between the left and the right brain. In one of the documentaries I have watched, some people who had some kind of a brain stroke or injury, it damaged the left brain - they had a hard time to talk and express verbally, and they became more artistic and emotional than what they were before(right brain become more active).
--
As for the underdeveloped fetus. It's just a cell damn it. Hell, we feel and learn and become aware when we are 4 years old(when our brain has reached a certain growth) and not beyond that.
But I support abortion in two cases: One if the fetus is still undeveloped and unwanted. Two, if the baby is deformed beyond recognition.
Its not just thinking. Animals think as well to some extend. Consciousness is sort of like Meta thinking. Being able to think over thinking. To understand why you do something, why you feel in a certain way, why you behave in a certain way and why you think in a certain way. You can rationalize yourself, and everything you do.
An animal just is, it doesnt ponder about the meaning of life or whatever. It exists because it was born, it will follow its biological needs like eating and sex and then it will at some point die. A human does all those things, but is aware of them, knows why he is doing it.
As for why it is like that, well, thank our super developed brain. And relating that to abortion, they can actually link parts of your consciousness to certain brain areas, and that makes it safe to say that when you abort within a certain amount of time, you abort something that has no brain, and therefor no consciousness.
[/quote]Exactly this. But Animals, unlike humans, respond just to superficial stimulus -- a primitive way of thinking.
Some scientist did a funny test using turkies, I am sure you know this one. The turkey didn't spend a minute to think that's it is copulating a dead turkey carcass, but more it does, the more depressed it looks -- it's mate is not isn't responding. Took the turkey a while to think that.
Human was once the same, responding via instinct to outside stimuli -- but human, amazingly, using it's already developed tools(eyes, hands and etc.), this primitive human was able to distinguish, quick to remember patterns and learn new techniques. Just how cubs learn hunting from their Mother, and the lions themselves know when and where they will find a hunt. Or some birds learned to crack nuts, or mice find their way around a maze(driven by instinct though, following food). Humans do just that, except we apply differently.
Now this was passed down from generation to generation -- breeding the best of thinkers. Human's ability to grasp new information. This is what lead to consciousness -- the cognitive ability to think, learn and remember. Not a moment pass without thinking.
It has nothing to do with spirit or anything, as with people with retarded mental growth and post-injury patients shows symptoms of slow learning new patterns and remembering old things for a reason - their brain is damaged. It just cannot handle the influx of information, or just cannot process it.
I am pretty sure you know the difference between the left and the right brain. In one of the documentaries I have watched, some people who had some kind of a brain stroke or injury, it damaged the left brain - they had a hard time to talk and express verbally, and they became more artistic and emotional than what they were before(right brain become more active).
--
As for the underdeveloped fetus. It's just a cell damn it. Hell, we feel and learn and become aware when we are 4 years old(when our brain has reached a certain growth) and not beyond that.
But I support abortion in two cases: One if the fetus is still undeveloped and unwanted. Two, if the baby is deformed beyond recognition.
[quote name='Biomega' timestamp='1306762811' post='141244']
I am pretty sure you know the difference between the left and the right brain. In one of the documentaries I have watched, some people who had some kind of a brain stroke or injury, it damaged the left brain - they had a hard time to talk and express verbally, and they became more artistic and emotional than what they were before(right brain become more active).
[/quote]
Actually, it goes much further then that. For example, people who were born blind, have for example the part of the brain that controls hearing, expand in the region that is usually reserved for sight.
I am pretty sure you know the difference between the left and the right brain. In one of the documentaries I have watched, some people who had some kind of a brain stroke or injury, it damaged the left brain - they had a hard time to talk and express verbally, and they became more artistic and emotional than what they were before(right brain become more active).
[/quote]
Actually, it goes much further then that. For example, people who were born blind, have for example the part of the brain that controls hearing, expand in the region that is usually reserved for sight.
[quote name='-lexus-' timestamp='1306770059' post='141310']
Actually, it goes much further then that. For example, people who were born blind, have for example the part of the brain that controls hearing, expand in the region that is usually reserved for sight.
[/quote]Yes, I have heard of that phenomenon. If one loses a sense or born without it, other senses are heightened.
Here is a nice page on brain, consciousness and perception.
Actually, it goes much further then that. For example, people who were born blind, have for example the part of the brain that controls hearing, expand in the region that is usually reserved for sight.
[/quote]Yes, I have heard of that phenomenon. If one loses a sense or born without it, other senses are heightened.
Here is a nice page on brain, consciousness and perception.
The issue of how consciousness arises and how one should define it have been central to psychology even before it was consider a "science" (Pre-Wundtian times, that is) and surely will continue for a long while. Everyone from Plato to James having some say on the issue. But only recently has real critical attention been given to the issue, and sadly this is largely to blame for the Behaviorist revolution which asserted the mind and consciousness to be little more than a "black box" or grammatical trap; influencing behavior very little. And lamentably, this was the main doctrine in American from Post-WW1 to the late 1950s to early 1960s. Though it still survives today, given only insofar as its valid scientific findings are concerned.
Honestly though, since the cognitive revolution in psychology, it is a surprise that the modern bio-psychological perspective in psychology and neurology have had the most to say on the issue. With more cognitive based perspectives in psychology only adding information on the so called "symptoms of consciousness" (Given of course it is still not a very well defined term.) and how it outwardly affects observable behavior. Still, to give my views on the subject I must first go into some depth about the two main fields to contribute to the topic at hand.
From research done within neurology and bio-psychology--using things like CAT scans, fMRIs, etc. to view brain functions while a patient undergoes certain tests or performs certain tasks--lateralization of the brain hemispheres is apparent to some degree as is localization of function. The later term being used to describe the structure-function relation of the brain, e.g. the fact that each structure of the brain carries out certain localized--though overlapping--functions. For example, when receiving perceptual stimulus, let's say from seeing something, the wavelengths being emitted from the object travel to various regions of the eye (The exact process a bit to arcane to spell out here). When certain rods or cones receives these wavelength, they transmit the signal into an electro-chemical signal. This information passes from the eyes, crossing sides into the opposite hemisphere where a process of decoding takes places. This decoding--once finished--is then evaluated by the "mind's eye" (As Gestaltist psychology made clear) and then more elaborate processes of response, ignorance and inaction, or emotional evaluation take place. And this is where the next key finding of these two fields comes in.
It has often been noted that several actions, be it hitting a ball with a bat, artistic behavior, or reacting to a punch, seem to defy proper calculations. To build on the example above, let us assume that the image we describe being perceived in the above paragraph is a fastball coming at a batter in a Baseball game. Screening out the cheers of the fans, the heat of the sun, the smell of sweat and dirt, his brain sees a fast ball screaming through the air at him. Now, this is where it gets interesting. Because normally, even if his brain was operating at its utmost peak of performance, it would be too slow to calculate what to do in a linier fashion (I.e. the visual information of the position of the ball, calculations of timing, then moving on to a reaction to that perceived stimulus; to give an over simplified example). What research psychologists and neurologists have found, and what cognitive psychologists have inferred existed, is a series of parallel processes of calculations and interpretation. Thus meaning that the brain operates on multiple levels of reasoning and evaluation at any given point in time; explaining why and how certain tasks can be done when they seemed to defy possibility in the linier interpretation of brain functions.
Now I am sure you are a little tired of this pretentious, verbose monologue. And I am sure you are saying, "So what?" Indeed, what I have written likely seems completely off topic and unrelated. But here is where I get to the point: if all of this were to hold true, a reasonable assumption or hypothesis of consciousness can be made. That is that consciousness is the overlapping and parallel functioning of higher level brain operations and structures in the forebrain. This alone can, theoretically, lead to an organisms self-awareness and that alone is a major facet of consciousness that--even with only a vague definition of it--almost any psychologist would agree with. Furthermore, it could also lead to definitive influences on behavior as observed by social and cognitive psychologists.
This is not to say that consciousness is not this beautiful facet of humanity that it was prior to such research. It still is, and whether by evolutionary genius or complete accident, it occurred, creating the single greatest human trait known to man. not only giving us more adaptive survivability, but allowed the creation of atypical behavior that contradicts evolutionary sensibility. It is this last thing, more than any other, that defines humanity, and without consciousness and mind, we likely wouldn't have it.
As for when it starts, I would say around the third trimester, when there is sufficient brain development for it to be created. For even if consciousness is not completely neurological like I purport, if brain lesions or surgical removal of brain tissue is done, you can essentially "remove" certain aspects or personality, emotion, self-awareness, and all other things related to "consciousness". Thus while it may not even be completely biological and neurological, it this fact alone proves that it has some grounding in such things. More on topic, it shows that there must be sufficient brain growth and development before consciousness even surfaces.
Honestly though, since the cognitive revolution in psychology, it is a surprise that the modern bio-psychological perspective in psychology and neurology have had the most to say on the issue. With more cognitive based perspectives in psychology only adding information on the so called "symptoms of consciousness" (Given of course it is still not a very well defined term.) and how it outwardly affects observable behavior. Still, to give my views on the subject I must first go into some depth about the two main fields to contribute to the topic at hand.
From research done within neurology and bio-psychology--using things like CAT scans, fMRIs, etc. to view brain functions while a patient undergoes certain tests or performs certain tasks--lateralization of the brain hemispheres is apparent to some degree as is localization of function. The later term being used to describe the structure-function relation of the brain, e.g. the fact that each structure of the brain carries out certain localized--though overlapping--functions. For example, when receiving perceptual stimulus, let's say from seeing something, the wavelengths being emitted from the object travel to various regions of the eye (The exact process a bit to arcane to spell out here). When certain rods or cones receives these wavelength, they transmit the signal into an electro-chemical signal. This information passes from the eyes, crossing sides into the opposite hemisphere where a process of decoding takes places. This decoding--once finished--is then evaluated by the "mind's eye" (As Gestaltist psychology made clear) and then more elaborate processes of response, ignorance and inaction, or emotional evaluation take place. And this is where the next key finding of these two fields comes in.
It has often been noted that several actions, be it hitting a ball with a bat, artistic behavior, or reacting to a punch, seem to defy proper calculations. To build on the example above, let us assume that the image we describe being perceived in the above paragraph is a fastball coming at a batter in a Baseball game. Screening out the cheers of the fans, the heat of the sun, the smell of sweat and dirt, his brain sees a fast ball screaming through the air at him. Now, this is where it gets interesting. Because normally, even if his brain was operating at its utmost peak of performance, it would be too slow to calculate what to do in a linier fashion (I.e. the visual information of the position of the ball, calculations of timing, then moving on to a reaction to that perceived stimulus; to give an over simplified example). What research psychologists and neurologists have found, and what cognitive psychologists have inferred existed, is a series of parallel processes of calculations and interpretation. Thus meaning that the brain operates on multiple levels of reasoning and evaluation at any given point in time; explaining why and how certain tasks can be done when they seemed to defy possibility in the linier interpretation of brain functions.
Now I am sure you are a little tired of this pretentious, verbose monologue. And I am sure you are saying, "So what?" Indeed, what I have written likely seems completely off topic and unrelated. But here is where I get to the point: if all of this were to hold true, a reasonable assumption or hypothesis of consciousness can be made. That is that consciousness is the overlapping and parallel functioning of higher level brain operations and structures in the forebrain. This alone can, theoretically, lead to an organisms self-awareness and that alone is a major facet of consciousness that--even with only a vague definition of it--almost any psychologist would agree with. Furthermore, it could also lead to definitive influences on behavior as observed by social and cognitive psychologists.
This is not to say that consciousness is not this beautiful facet of humanity that it was prior to such research. It still is, and whether by evolutionary genius or complete accident, it occurred, creating the single greatest human trait known to man. not only giving us more adaptive survivability, but allowed the creation of atypical behavior that contradicts evolutionary sensibility. It is this last thing, more than any other, that defines humanity, and without consciousness and mind, we likely wouldn't have it.
As for when it starts, I would say around the third trimester, when there is sufficient brain development for it to be created. For even if consciousness is not completely neurological like I purport, if brain lesions or surgical removal of brain tissue is done, you can essentially "remove" certain aspects or personality, emotion, self-awareness, and all other things related to "consciousness". Thus while it may not even be completely biological and neurological, it this fact alone proves that it has some grounding in such things. More on topic, it shows that there must be sufficient brain growth and development before consciousness even surfaces.