KingEbukasBlog:


Hmmmm

So what is real and what is false ? Are all truths real ?

Take a look at this :

I want you and ifenes to focus on these types of truths :

1. Necessary truth :1+1=2 .This is a necessary truth . It is not dependent on our thoughts or beliefs . It can never be false because necessary truths are proposition that could not possibly have been false. The are true in every possible world .

2. Contingent truth : A contingent truth is a true proposition that could have been false . This is true in some possible worlds and not in other possible worlds.

3. Synthetic Truth : In this case , this truth can only be determined by relying on observation and experience.

With these , not everything is dependent on our thoughts and beliefs . Sometimes our experiences mould our thoughts and beliefs . I mean ontological arguments are formed or are based on these truths and more .



Hasty generalization .

There are Christians who have willingly laid their lives down because of their beliefs . During the communists regime (past and present ) led by the wicked despotic atheists , there were numerous cases of Christians who died because of their beliefs . The martyrs did same - historical evidence buttresses this .

Christians who are afraid are obviously not sure of their salvation .

But err , the fear of death is a natural thing . Even the brain is designed to ensure your survival . Emotions that are triggered in the face of danger are just concomitant and involuntary .

Your hatred of atheism is really amusing, lol

Seun:
Thanks for this opportunity. I disagree with the premises below:

Consciousness is not yet fully explained by physical laws, but you don't know that a physical law that can explain consciousness won't be discovered tomorrow morning, so it is premature to conclude that consciousness follows no physical law. For now, we just don't know.

If it is not yet FULLY EXPLAINED by physical laws that implies some physical laws explain it. Which ones? I do not think physical laws can explain consciousness in principle because consciousness is non-physical. Physical laws do not apply to non-physical things.

Seun:

We don't know this for sure. It seems true, but it's perhaps that some objects we consider to be unconscious are just unable to communicate.

If this is true science is in trouble. Conscious beings have choice they act on their will and are only bound to outside forces unless something prevents them such as in locked-in syndrome in humans due to stroke. This would mean all matter may consciously violate physical laws. It would even imply that corpses and stones could be conscious but unable to communicate. It would mean animism has truth to it since it also posits that inanimate things like rivers are conscious. Is it not strange that an atheist entertains this possibility?

Seun:

Now to the questions I can understand:

It appears to have originated during the evolution of animals, but I certainly don't know the details. Waiting for biologists to figure it out.

Okay. But I don't accept evolution by which I mean universal common ancestry. Since consciousness is not physical I do not think evolutionary mechanisms can explain its origins, only how it may be affected.

Seun:

What explains the fact that we need legs to walk?

Walking is defined by motion of the foot using the legs. There are various ways to move but there are no other ways to know things exist. Your rhetoric here is poor. I will assume this as you saying I don't want to think about it.

Seun:

How do our legs allow us to walk to places that we have never been to before?

Because those places are land which the legs function to walk on. In water, we cannot walk only swim, float or drown. On land at the bottom of the ocean in a diving suit one can walk.
As I said you do not want to think.

Seun:

In the absence of any actual evidence that God even exists, what's the basis for suggesting that he is the primordial cause of consciousness?

This is just another God of the gaps type of argument. We don't fully understand X at the current time, therefore God is responsible for X.

On the contrary, it is what I know about consciousness that makes me sugget God exists. Atheists like you frequently accuse believers or arguing from ignorance when we do not.

The basis for the suggestion is THAT 1) matter at its basic does not account for consciousness YET 2) matter exhibits properties that are functionally necessary not logically so yet matter follows laws of logic which aren't physical laws but mental ones IMPLYING 3) consciousness is fundamental to material existence it is not accessory to it SO 4) since we see conscious beings effect conscious beings we can posit that a non-contingent conscious being designed matter to effect consciousness.

KingEbukasBlog:


Lol . The way you are slaying yasef here sha . If thoughts create your reality , then you shouldn't criticize someone who has tailored his thoughts to create his reality . His thoughts have now transmuted into his reality . The point is : Since you believe God is not real , God is not real to you ; if another believes God is real , God is real to him .

Now the problem is : what is real and false since our thoughts and beliefs create our reality ? And why are you correct about God's existence and why I'm I wrong
Please leave transfixed

These atheists! They never cease to both amuse and annoy me.

PastorAIO:
The only events that we can say for sure are happenings are our Experiences.

If I see a cow I cannot say for sure that the cow exists, but I can state for sure that my Experience of seeing the cow exists.

Whether the experience is based on and truly represents an objective event, or is a misconstruing of the real objective reality is something I cannot ever ascertain. All I have is the experience, I cannot perceive beyond it.

All experience is a part and parcel of Consciousness....

The inertness of a rock that i hold in my hand is a part of Consciousness. The Tree that I climb is a part of Consciousness. The heartbreak that I feel is a part of consciousness.....

Misguided and watered-down solipsism. Pity!

ifenes:

Consciousness itself is the highest frequency Energy can Vibrate.

Consciousness is not energy. Energy is the ability of a physical system to do work. Energy does not and cannot vibrate only matter does. There is even vibrational energy which is energy from any vibrating phsyical thing.

ifenes:

It is similar to the "Steam" state of Energy that transforms to Liquid and then Matter(physical).

You mean the gaseous state which transforms to liquid then solid.

ifenes:

Everything in life goes through three phases depending on how high or low they vibrate.

Humans go through gaseous and liquid state abi! Even diamond? Nice!

ifenes:

From God to Man or from Steam to Ice.

I though you said man is God. Or is God real like steam?

ifenes:

I will compare the Physical state as the Zombie state where Consciousness "seem to be" limited. It is a state which suppressed form of Energy experiences illusion of Time,Motions etc. The higher this Zombie vibrates, the more liquid like it becomes(awakening) and becomes Steam.

SMH. Time and motion are not illusions.

ifenes:

So Consciousness being the highest form of existence is the state at which a particle is one and everything.

Ebuka please tell me you did not like this post.

KingEbukasBlog:


Do I have to ?

It depends on your perspective or perception of life though ? Is the physical realm the only plane of existence ? Do you see death as some kind of transition ?

If you do , then death lets you experience a greater sense of awareness because it liberates the spirit mind .

If you want to speculate baselessly then I'm happy to do that with you. We'll see who has the more fantastic imagination. However if you really want to know what a dead man thinks then I cannot honestly be of any help to you.
There is even a passage in the bile that says 'the dead know nothing'. Ecclesiastes chapter 9

UyiIredia:
Disappointing!

.

Conflating what? I began with a definition of consciousness.

Conflating a lot of different ideas and calling them consciousness.

For example, you said that Consciousness is Self AWareness. And awareness of one's environment. Then you go further to say that it is based on physical things. Then further you say sleepy people are not as conscious as people in active concentration. Then you even tell us with absolute authority that matter and energy (whatever those are) are not conscious.

I do not see any cogency in all these things that you've wrapped together. I just get the sense that you are not someone that has explored consciousness very deeply.

UyiIredia:
Disappointing!

.


Indeed. That is when by consciousness one means the mind. In the truest sense it is one's identity. One's personality can change but your self awareness (knowing you exist) never changes while one is alive and exhibits it.

What do you mean by 'Self'? If you mean something distinct from the rest of the world, ie a Self and it's Environment, then consciousness cannot be limited to the Self because when you get deep into consciousness you find that it is coterminous with the entire experience, ie the entire universe. I'm not the first person to say this.

If you consider that Existent is comprised of Experience and that Experience is organised and order by dividing it into the Self and the Other you'll see that this so called Self is just a creation of the mind (after consciousness) to help organise experience. The Self is just a device and as such it is subject to change. The sense of identity is malleable.
It is possible to be highly conscious without any sense of identity. These are subjective experiences and cannot really be discussed or argued over. It is either you've experienced it or you haven't.

What is the state of consciousness of a man who wakes in the middle of the night, goes downstairs and makes a sandwich, bumps into another house member and has a brief chat, then goes back to bed, Then wakes up the next morning and cannot remember any of it. Was he conscious while it was all happening?

UyiIredia:
Disappointing!

.


In deep sleep you are not conscious so it is useless given your first statement. One may change personality or be dazed but one's consciousness remains in either case.

The fact that you cannot remember what happens during deep sleep does not mean that you are not conscious.

Can you tell me what the connection is between Memory and your Sense of Identity?

UyiIredia:


Wrong. Consciousness essentially involves knowing existence of anything illusory or real. That's easy.

But things exist whether there are conscious lifeforms or not. They do not need our consciousness to exist. Obviously. So one cannot say consciousness and existence are the same.

Existence would be anything that has being in itself or as concieved/percieved in a mind.

Lol! You're funny. Well, as you've marked me wrong with even trying to tackle what I said then I'd better just leave it there.

I see Consciousness as being Conscious of Consciousness in it's purest form. In other words it is a verb and it is a noun at the same time. Consciousness is the act of being conscious (verb) of consciousness (noun). Even if there were no external things to be conscious of one would still be conscious with the consciousness basking in itself.

One can experience this in a state of deep meditation when your awareness is withdrawn from external objects and comes to rest solely on itself. One is no longer aware of other things, but is simply aware of the act of being aware.



I wonder how you know that things would continue to exist if there were nothing like consciousness to be aware of them. How did you come by this information?

UyiIredia:


It depends on what you mean by subjective. Consciousness is objective since it is the means by which we know what is subjective and objective. It is also subjective for that reason. Even if it were subjective it will not make my premises moot, they don't need consciousness to be demonstrable like matter. That is piss poor reasoning. Try again.

adjective
1.
existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ).

Consciousness cannot be demonstrated. It occurs totally in the mind of the conscious person. Consciousness deals ultimately with itself and nothing external to it. It does not affect anything external to it in anyway that is demonstrable to another person.

Fire is hot: This is an objective statement.
To demonstrate it I can put your hand over a flame and I'm quite certain that you will agree with me.

UyiIredia:


Consciousness is not energy. Energy is the ability of a physical system to do work. Energy does not and cannot vibrate only matter does. There is even vibrational energy which is energy from any vibrating phsyical thing.



You mean the gaseous state which transforms to liquid then solid.



Humans go through gaseous and liquid state abi! Even diamond? Nice!



I though you said man is God. Or is God real like steam?



SMH. Time and motion are not illusions.



Ebuka please tell me you did not like this post.

The attributes you give to god are the attributes of the totality of man/ animals etc. Physical reality is a tiny aspect of consciousness. What you call God is the " original state" the physical being ( man, animal , planets etc ). You don't sound like someone who is open minded enough to understand that God cannot be objectified. God is not a person or object but a quality that can be attained by Matter/ physical being/ human.

Time and motion are illusion. If you say they are not you need to go back to school. Time is a block on your God attribute of being everywhere at ones. Time is an illusionary barrier to living multiple lives at once. Time gave birth to reincarnation etc.

Because you are Consciousness itself ,the Universe is in you, physical reality radiates from your mind.

Consciousness is a natural phenomenon. The mechanism of its process, has sufficiently been explained in books (biosychology /behavioral neuroscience).

akintom:
Consciousness is a natural phenomenon. The mechanism of its process, has sufficiently been explained in books (biosychology /behavioral neuroscience).

Could you please address the posers. The mechanism of what causes consciousness is being explained by neuroscience. Consciousness is the result of the mechanisms in the brain. It is not those mechanisms.

UyiIredia:


Could you please address the posers. The mechanism of what causes consciousness is being explained by neuroscience. Consciousness is the result of the mechanisms in the brain. It is not those mechanisms.

I can't make any sense of this. Can you please make yourself intelligible?

PastorAIO:
.
Consciousness cannot be demonstrated. It occurs totally in the mind of the conscious person.

Yet we distinguish between conscious and unconscious beings everyday. Your latter statement is true while the former one is partially false. Inasmuch consciousness is undemonstrable unlike matter we know enough about conscious beings to infer when one is conscious or not.

PastorAIO:

Consciousness deals ultimately with itself and nothing external to it. It does not affect anything external to it in anyway that is demonstrable to another person.

Wrong. Consciousness percieves that which is external to it. When we carry out choices our consciousness is having a demonstrable effect on the world.

PastorAIO:

Fire is hot: This is an objective statement.
To demonstrate it I can put your hand over a flame and I'm quite certain that you will agree with me.

Put the hand of a leprous person with dead nerves. He will disagree. Curious you are using a subjective conscious experience of fire to show it is hot.

akintom:

I can't make any sense of this. Can you please make yourself intelligible?

You did not answer the questions in my OP. And consciousness is not natural, otherwise it would be subject to physical laws. Maybe you can tell me the physical laws consciousness follows.

UyiIredia:


You did not answer the questions in my OP. And consciousness is not natural, otherwise it would be subject to physical laws. Maybe you can tell me the physical laws consciousness follows.

I have since stopped engaging most apologists here, for simple reason that they are too consumed with their conclusions, before they post stuff.

You did put up many posers, and i chose to respond to one(is consciousness natural or supernatural phenomenon?) of them.

Here you are saying i didn't answer your question.

It's obvious that you are too glued to your pre-conclusion, that you possibly can't see how consciousness is a natural phenomenon, just like cognition, memory and emotion.

The very physical laws that regulates the other neurophysiological phenomenon via neural electrochemical mechanism.

PastorAIO:

Lol! You're funny. Well, as you've marked me wrong with even trying to tackle what I said then I'd better just leave it there.

I'm used to your inanities.

PastorAIO:

I see Consciousness as being Conscious of Consciousness in it's purest form. In other words it is a verb and it is a noun at the same time. Consciousness is the act of being conscious (verb) of consciousness (noun). Even if there were no external things to be conscious of one would still be conscious with the consciousness basking in itself.

Incomplete definition. One may be self aware but also in relation to other things. Where no external things exist consciousness is aware of that.

PastorAIO:

One can experience this in a state of deep meditation when your awareness is withdrawn from external objects and comes to rest solely on itself. One is no longer aware of other things, but is simply aware of the act of being aware.

Okay.

PastorAIO:

I wonder how you know that things would continue to exist if there were nothing like consciousness to be aware of them. How did you come by this information?

Because I met them. I also know formerly conscious bodies still exist even though they are dead. I also see pictures and other evidence of their existence when I was unconscious.

akintom:

I have since stopped engaging most apologists here, for simple reason that they are too consumed with their conclusions, before they post stuff.

You did put up many posers, and i chose to respond to one(is consciousness natural or supernatural phenomenon?) of them.

Here you are saying i didn't answer your question.

It's obvious that you are too glued to your pre-conclusion, that you possibly can't see how consciousness is a natural phenomenon, just like cognition, memory and emotion.

The very physical laws that regulates the other neurophysiological phenomenon via neural electrochemical mechanism.

Take the brain. It is subject to gravity since it falls to earth unsuspended. It follows Newton's laws of motion, shoot a bullet through a brain and it is displaced accordingly. It is a system of chemical compounds, elements and ions subject to laws of chemistry. Concentrated sulfuric acids will corrode your brain as they do other other part of your body.

The human brain has mass of about 1.2 - 1.4 kg. It has an average volume of about 1200cm3. Those are some of the brain's physical properties.

I have just explained how physical laws like motion and gravity and chemical reactions applyto the brain. Consciousness is not the brain. Refer to my definition of consciousness in my premises. Explain how that has physical properties and follows physical laws.

If you go on fooling yourself that consciousness is just activities in the brain then I have nothing more to say to you.

PastorAIO:

Conflating a lot of different ideas and calling them consciousness.

More idiocy.

PastorAIO:

For example, you said that Consciousness is Self AWareness. And awareness of one's environment.

Check your dictionary. Consciousness and self awareness are synonyms. The mean the same thing.

PastorAIO:

Then you go further to say that it is based on physical things.

Did I say consciousness are those physical things? The idiocy I talked of. Is the human body not physical?

PastorAIO:

Then further you say sleepy people are not as conscious as people in active concentration.

Maybe they are to you.

PastorAIO:

Then you even tell us with absolute authority that matter and energy (whatever those are) are not conscious.

If you must say whatever those are of matter and snergy then it must be an uneducated person I speak with. Primary school education is okay to learn the basics of matter and energy. Even then many uneducated people know what matter and energy is so it must be something worse. Some could be a dunce.

PastorAIO:

I do not see any cogency in all these things that you've wrapped together. I just get the sense that you are not someone that has explored consciousness very deeply.

Shallowness in thinking is oft presented as clarity and depth of thought. It is a popular fraud. Cheers.

UyiIredia:


Take the brain. It is subject to gravity since it falls to earth unsuspended. It follows Newton's laws of motion, shoot a bullet through a brain and it is displaced accordingly. It is a system of chemical compounds, elements and ions subject to laws of chemistry. Concentrated sulfuric acids will corrode your brain as they do other other part of your body.

The human brain has mass of about 1.2 - 1.4 kg. It has an average volume of about 1200cm3. Those are some of the brain's physical properties.

I have just explained how physical laws like motion and gravity and chemical reactions applyto the brain. Consciousness is not the brain. Refer to my definition of consciousness in my premises. Explain how that has physical properties and follows physical laws.

If you go on fooling yourself that consciousness is just activities in the brain then I have nothing more to say to you.

"Premises
consciousness: the state of self-awareness including awareness of one's environs."

The above is one of your definition premises (which i chose to respond from).

If consciousness is mere awareness of my internal and external environment, and just told you that am able to exercise this ability because my brain is functioning normally.

All you needed to do is tell me how this is wrong. Rather than engaging in pseudoscience gist.

* it's obvious that you are confused about your thread.

* you lack basic understanding of what physical laws mean.

* when you understand that the mind is what the brain does, your difficulty will be helped.

Since you think that your imaginary God is the source of consciousness, there's no way you wouldn't be writhing in self inflicted confusion about your thread.

What you don't know is that, i can in inject you with psychoactive drugs, that will suspend your consciousness (awareness), while you're still talking and walking about.

Do well not to copy me when next you're out to display intellectual arrogance and fraud.

PastorAIO:

The fact that you cannot remember what happens during deep sleep does not mean that you are not conscious.

If you say remember then you are assuming consciousness during DEEP sleep which is illogical. In a DEEP sleep you are unconscious and unresponsive since the brain is at its most inactive state.

In a normal sleep you can be conscious and responsive to your environs eg slapping away mosquitoes, changing position when uncomfortable and experience dreams, events you may or may not remember.

PastorAIO:

Can you tell me what the connection is between Memory and your Sense of Identity?

Identity does not always mean self-awareness. In fact, it usually refers to one personality, ethicnicity, physical traits etc which make up a person's identity.

If you mean the connection between consciousness and memory then memories are past events one percieved at the time, even though one may be unconscious of it now and so cannot remember it.

akintom:


"Premises
consciousness: the state of self-awareness including awareness of one's environs."

The above is one of your definition premises (which i chose to respond from).

Then I assume you agreed with it.

akintom:

If consciousness is mere awareness of my internal and external environment, and just told you that am able to exercise this ability because my brain is functioning normally.

You do not need to tell me that. My premises included that fact.

akintom:

All you needed to do is tell me how this is wrong. Rather than engaging in pseudoscience gist.

This is where you engage in deception. I never denied that the brain causes consciousness.

What I explicitly denied was that
activities (or mechanisms) in the brain are consciousness. Again refer to definition of consciousness you agree with. That is consciousness. That is not the brain or its neurological activities. They cause consciousness, they are NOT consciousness. Basic logic.

akintom:

* it's obvious that you are confused about your thread.

I am not.

akintom:

* you lack basic understanding of what laws mean.

Citation required.

akintom:

* when you understand that the mind is what the brain does, your difficulty will be helped.

The foolishness I was talking about. The mind is what the brain does, the mind is not what the brain IS. Note the difference. Many atheists do not and display confusion on the matter. Telling me properties and laws the brain follows is not the same as telling me what the mind or consciousness is. Try again.

akintom:

Since you think that your imaginary God is the source of consciousness, there's no way you wouldn't be writhing in self inflicted confusion about your thread.

*shrugs*

akintom:

Do well not to copy me when next you're out to display intellectual arrogance and fraud.

You mean the rubbish that passes for your mind. I'll think about it. Even sh*t could be useful_ask Otunba Gadaffi_so I may still need you.

UyiIredia:


More idiocy.

Please, why do you call it idiocy instead of asking for an explanation?

Check your dictionary. Consciousness and self awareness are synonyms. The mean the same thing.

Se you see why I say that you are conflating a lot of things. There are a lot of different ways the word consciousness is used. The dictionary is not an authority on this subject. I'd rather defer to a yogi or someone who has actually studied consciousness and not a book that lists all the usages of a word including layman's usage and even slang and misconstruings of the word.

Did I say consciousness are those physical things? The idiocy I talked of. Is the human body not physical?

No, but you said, and I said that you said, that it is based on physical things. Now if you want to discuss and defend your baseless claim that it is based on physical things then I'm all ears, but if you want to bask in Irony by calling my post idiocy then let me just sit back and be entertained.

Maybe they are to you.

Like I said, you haven't really gone deeply into this subject and you conflate a lot of unrelated or vaguely related things and your musings are just a gordian knot of inanities. Let me help you a little...

May I introduce you to a phenomenon called Attention. Attention is when a Conscious being directs it's awareness towards a limited direction. (please note I'm using these 3 words as separate things, Consciousness, Attention, and Awareness). The effect of this directing of Attention is that as one experiences the area where attention is directed more intensely at the same time all other areas are experienced less intensely. So for example, if I'm reading a book and I have totally focused my attention on the book it is quite possible that someone could walking into the room and call my name but I would not be aware of them. I am still a Conscious being but my awareness has been directed away from the room and my environment and directed towards the book. It is therefore possible to direct and concentrate awareness like that. This has no bearing on Consciousness or on your status as a conscious being.

A person that is asleep is not a person that is unconscious. It is merely a person whose attention has been directed towards other realms so they are no longer fully aware of their physical environment. In your sleep you can dream quite actively and Consciousness is in no way diminished. Attention has merely been diverted to your inner world.

Awareness can be more intense or less intense depending on how your attention is directed, the more you concentrate on something the less aware you will be of everything else.

If you must say whatever those are of matter and snergy then it must be an uneducated person I speak with. Primary school education is okay to learn the basics of matter and energy. Even then many uneducated people know what matter and energy is so it must be something worse. Some could be a dunce.

It's either I'm an uneducated person or I am a person who does not just swallow everything that I learned in primary school Hook Line and Sinker. Luckily for me in my education I learned to question Authority so I do not become a puppet ijot like some other people I know.

Shallowness in thinking is oft presented as clarity and depth of thought. It is a popular fraud. Cheers.

Cheers. I hope my reponses above can be of help to you. I actually appreciate that you are someone that is drawn to the deeper things and I'm just trying to help you approach it with a bit more clarity.

UyiIredia:


I'm used to your inanities.



Incomplete definition. One may be self aware but also in relation to other things. Where no external things exist consciousness is aware of that.

Self Awareness is not Pure Consciousness. I can bet my last pant that you haven't even thought about what you mean when you say 'Self'.

Okay.



Because I met them. I also know formerly conscious bodies still exist even though they are dead. I also see pictures and other evidence of their existence when I was unconscious.

I'll repeat the question. How do you know that physical things continue to exist if there is no consciousness?

when you say you met them, what or who have you met exactly?

Please what is the connection/interrelationship of Memory, Consciousness, and Identity?

UyiIredia:


Yet we distinguish between conscious and unconscious beings everyday. Your latter statement is true while the former one is partially false. Inasmuch consciousness is undemonstrable unlike matter we know enough about conscious beings to infer when one is conscious or not.

This is nonsense. Especially the bolded part.

Wrong. Consciousness percieves that which is external to it. When we carry out choices our consciousness is having a demonstrable effect on the world.

A programmed computer makes choices all the time having a demonstrable effect on the world. Does this mean that the computer is Conscious? My brother, Consciousness has nothing to do with the choices we make.

Put the hand of a leprous person with dead nerves. He will disagree. Curious you are using a subjective conscious experience of fire to show it is hot.

Perhaps you don't know what objective means. As long as there are other people with whole hands that can corroborate that fire is hot then it is an objective fact. the Leper does not change that.
Please go and look up what Objective means and Subjective too.

UyiIredia:


Misguided and watered-down solipsism. Pity!

Please, what exactly is wrong with Solipsism?

PastorAIO:

No, but you said, and I said that you said, that it is based on physical things. Now if you want to discuss and defend your baseless claim that it is based on physical things then I'm all ears, but if you want to bask in Irony by calling my post idiocy then let me just sit back and be entertained.
[/color]

Ah! I was going to reply the nonsense rife in your reply but when one sees this

"Now if you want to discuss and defend your baseless claim that it [consciousness] is based on physical things then I'm all ears"

what's the use. It would be like arguing with a flat-earther or conspiracy theorist. So mired in their delusions reality makes no bearing on their fancies. In your case, a hit on the head with a baseball bat MAY drive home the point. Still . . .

One wonders where yogis and experts derive their definition of consciousness from. Or whether their definitions aren't to be seen in dictionaries.

Some people wisely question authority. Many people stupidly do so and make fools of themsleves while at it oblivious to the fact. You fall in the latter class.

"Awareness can be more intense or less intense depending on how your attention is directed, the more you concentrate on something the less aware you will be of everything else."

Saying this validates my point. Of course you don't see that which is why you wrote it. Consciousness is awareness.

That would be all. Good day.

PastorAIO:

Self Awareness is not Pure Consciousness. I can bet my last pant that you haven't even thought about what you mean when you say 'Self'.

Yes, Ta Panta Rhei. You're still at it. Can't you get your mind
off your pants. Panta rhei ko, pata re e ni.

KingEbukasBlog:


Hmmmm

So what is real and what is false ? Are all truths real ?

Take a look at this :

I want you and ifenes to focus on these types of truths :

1. Necessary truth :1+1=2 .This is a necessary truth . It is not dependent on our thoughts or beliefs . It can never be false because necessary truths are proposition that could not possibly have been false. The are true in every possible world .

2. Contingent truth : A contingent truth is a true proposition that could have been false . This is true in some possible worlds and not in other possible worlds.

3. Synthetic Truth : In this case , this truth can only be determined by relying on observation and experience.

With these , not everything is dependent on our thoughts and beliefs . Sometimes our experiences mould our thoughts and beliefs . I mean ontological arguments are formed or are based on these truths and more .

All this big big grammar... and for what?
I'm only aware of one kind of Truth. I define it as ... That which is, and always is, the case.

Hasty generalization .

There are Christians who have willingly laid their lives down because of their beliefs . During the communists regime (past and present ) led by the wicked despotic atheists , there were numerous cases of Christians who died because of their beliefs . The martyrs did same - historical evidence buttresses this .

Christians who are afraid are obviously not sure of their salvation .

But err , the fear of death is a natural thing . Even the brain is designed to ensure your survival . Emotions that are triggered in the face of danger are just concomitant and involuntary .

None of this has any bearing on what I said. There are people who claim to believe one thing yet their behaviour suggests that deep down in their subconscious they believe differently. The fact that some other people exhibit total belief does not change the fact that many people believe only 'consciously' but in their subconscious it is a different story.
A man who believes God will punish sinners and thieves yet continues to steal and sin obviously is not convinced of his conscious belief at a subconscious level. And guess what? The subconscious has more influence on our behaviour than our conscious.
(please I'm using the terms conscious now to mean awareness.)

UyiIredia:


Then I assume you agreed with it.



You do not need to tell me that. My premises included that fact.



This is where you engage in deception. I never denied that the brain causes consciousness.

What I explicitly denied was that
activities (or mechanisms) in the brain are consciousness. Again refer to definition of consciousness you agree with. That is consciousness. That is not the brain or its neurological activities. They cause consciousness, they are NOT consciousness. Basic logic.



I am not.



Citation required.



The foolishness I was talking about. The mind is what the brain does, the mind is not what the brain IS. Note the difference. Many atheists do not and display confusion on the matter. Telling me properties and laws the brain follows is not the same as telling me what the mind or consciousness is. Try again.



*shrugs*



You mean the rubbish that passes for your mind. I'll think about it. Even sh*t could be useful_ask Otunba Gadaffi_so I may still need you.

You have simply further confirmed your confusion.

The source of your confusion stream from the fact that you don't know that "consciousness" is the convergent adjective, for the multi-neural activities of brain, that gives awareness capability and ability.

Your smoky mind wouldn't allow you see, that i didn't at any point say that consciousness occupies a specific location in the brain.

With all this your dark tunnel race, you haven't yet presented a meaningful position on your own thread.

"That is not the brain or its neurological activities. They cause consciousness, they are NOT consciousness. Basic logic."

What sense did you think you made up there?

If i can inject your brain with psychoactive drug, and cause significant suspension of your consciousness, what does that tell you about the mutual inclusiveness of brain and consciousness?