Consciousness vs Unconsciousness

[Matt Gregory]

So what characterizes the conscious mind, anyway? I don't think these terms are very clear.

If something appears in someone's mind, is that enough to consider them conscious?

What if two things appear in their mind at once, does that make them more conscious than someone who's only thinking one thing?

Does the length of time of an object in consciousness matter? What about the intensity?

What about someone whose mind constantly drifts all over the place versus a mind that's concentrated on one thing? Which type of mind is more conscious?

What about a mind that's vaguely aware of many things versus intensely aware of only one thing? Which one is more conscious?

[Kevin Solway]

So what characterizes the conscious mind, anyway?

Perhaps an illustration will suffice.

Let's say you've just explained cause and effect to someone, and they've illustrated to you that they've understood the concept of it. That is, they understand that all things happen because they're caused to happen.

Now there's a huge difference between the person who is working on an "unconscious" level, and another who is more conscious. The difference is very noticeable in application.

For only five minutes later, the unconscious person is asking things like "Why do babies have do die? Why does God allow babies to be born only for them to die in pain?" Clearly the unconscious person hasn't understood cause and effect at all. The concept has not made even a slight impression on the surface of their brain. You could perhaps think of it as a momentary shadow that was cast upon their brain, which then disappears.

By contrast, the conscious person learns more slowly, since he has to fully digest what he is receiving, and integrate it with all else that he knows. And being conscious, he knows a lot.

But when he knows something, he knows it to the core of his being, and it will inform all of his thoughts and actions.

[Matt Gregory]

So, consistency is consciousness, would you say? That seems about right to me. In fact, I hope it's right because that would simplify a lot of things.

[s_e]

So, consistency is consciousness, would you say?

How to become conscious (according to your rule)...

1.) Position head over bricks.

2.) Smash head into bricks.

3.) Lift head from bricks.

4.) Repeat.

[emma]

Consciousness only takes us so far in answering all the questions.(simplicity does not equal truth) When consciousness is exhaused we need to explore the unconscious, ie feelings emotions passion etc . If we bear in mind that GOD is benign and everything that is not benign is man-made we can guide our way thro the unconscious maze back to consciousness and give the search for Truth new vigor

A Mother loses a baby for no reason. Conscious searching for the Truth, the reason for the death leads nowhere. It is no ones fault. Unconscious consideration that God is Benign and all that is wrong/bad/harmful is the work of human satisfies us and we return to consciousness looking once more at the reasons ...........then truth can be found.

[Kevin Solway]

So, consistency is consciousness, would you say? That seems about right to me. In fact, I hope it's right because that would simplify a lot of things.

Yes, consistency, which is closely tied to memory, character, and truthfulness.

Unconscious people cannot be consistent over time because they are always reflecting their immediate surroundings - which are always changing. They have no "I", no character, no soul, and no genius.

Liars find it impossible to be consistent over time, because lies conflict with reality. So the consciousness of the liar is extremely limited.

[Edited grammar]

[emma]

Sorry to butt in again but.
KS said

Yes, consistency, which is closely tied to memory, character, and truthfulness.

Unconscious people cannot be consistent over time because they are always reflecting their immediate surroundings - which are always changing. They have no "I", no character, no soul, and no genius.

The more I one has the more attachments, the more attachments, the less chance of enlightenment. besides which there is no thing as an unconscious person, its all a matter of degrees

Liars find it impossible to be consistent over time, because lies conflict with reality. So the consciousness of the liar is extremely limited.

Reality is not constant over time either. Lies are not consistent over time , but neither is the truth.

[emma]

......well actually there is one Truth, one constant that never changes ........GOD........Forgive my error

[Kevin Solway]

The more I one has the more attachments, the more attachments, the less chance of enlightenment.

The "I" you are referring to here is the ego, which is a false "I". It does not really exist.

But there is a true "I" possessed by wise people - people of character. Being true, this "I" does not have attachments.

The more unconscious a person is the less of any kind of an "I" the person has. They cannot even have much of a false "I" - an ego. They are below being egotistical.

They exist in realms that can be called "animal realms". Which is to say they have been "reborn" in the animal realms. Most human beings are just like this. Like animals, all they care about is sex, food and shelter.

[emma]

So being unconscious=only being concerned with basic human needs.........Agreed and Understood

[emma]

Is Love an unconscious thing?

[emma]

Is it not being unconscious to deny that we are "spirit", that there is a GOD, that many things cannot be answered with mere reason/logic also
Perhaps we have unconscious/semi-conscious and conscious ........maybe a better description than unelightened and enlightened

[Kevin Solway]

So being unconscious=only being concerned with basic human needs.

No. Being concerned only with basic animal needs, or experiencing emotions (which is also an animal thing), is only one sign of unconsciousness.

Is it not being unconscious to deny that we are "spirit", that there is a GOD

You keep talking about God as though there were some separate being called "God" - something other than yourself. So long as you keep talking like that no-one will understand what you are on about.

that many things cannot be answered with mere reason/logic

Give me an example of something that can't be answered by reason.

Is Love an unconscious thing?

Normal human love, in all its forms, is based on unconsciousness, yes.

[emma]

KS wrote

Give me an example of something that can't be answered by reason.

God cannot be answered by reason. If you like the tao the God that can be understood with reason is not God.....reason plus passion gets you further

[emma]

KS wrote

You keep talking about God as though there were some separate being called "God" - something other than yourself. So long as you keep talking like that no-one will understand what you are on about.

err you've lost me here .what don't you understand, God is a separate being and is more than the sum of everything finite. God is infinite, all knowing/all seeing but still gives his children free rein .Why are you so puzzled?

[Kevin Solway]

God cannot be answered by reason.

Reason is necessarily the means by which we know everything we can possibly know. Without reason, there is just meaninglessness.

You keep talking about God as though there were some separate being called "God" - something other than yourself. So long as you keep talking like that no-one will understand what you are on about.

err you've lost me here .what don't you understand, God is a separate being and is more than the sum of everything finite.

I totally reject the possibility of the existence of such a God. It is a logical impossibility. So whenever you talk about "God" it is completely meaningless to me, and probably to everyone else on this forum.

There is no Infinite apart from finite things. For that reason there can be no separate "God".

[emma]

KS wrote

Reason is necessarily the means by which we know everything we can possibly know. Without reason, there is just meaninglessness.

Incorrect. reason just shows the limit of the reasoning mind. There are things which we feel to be right.....and they are just so.

I

totally reject the possibility of the existence of such a God. It is a logical impossibility. So whenever you talk about "God" it is completely meaningless to me, and probably to everyone else on this forum.

There is no Infinite apart from finite things. For that reason there can be no separate "God".

There are many things today that appear as logical impossibilities that one day will be possibilities and even actualities so you are just using the limited knowledge of today. With regards to God Einstein did not conclude God was a "logical impossibilty" and neither did many from Kierkegaard thro to Emerson. I don't understand why you can't see that reason and logic only serve to show ignorance not knowledge

What does "there is no infinite apart from finite things" actuially mean?

.and explain to me why you think logic and reason are all that is required for Enlightenment and the Truth . Arent they grounded by our ignorance/partial knowledge and understanding .

Did you understand the significance of the Matthew quote you made on another topic and the quote that was underneath .not a strange coincidence .more like divine intervention

[Kevin Solway]

There are things which we feel to be right.....and they are just so.

How do you know that what you feel is right?

For example, let's say you feel thirsty. How do you know you are thirsty?

You are thirsty because you feel thirsty. That's reason.

There is no Infinite apart from finite things. For that reason there can be no separate "God".

What does "there is no infinite apart from finite things" actuially mean?

Finite things are the body of the Infinite.

In the same way that you have hands and feet, God has finite things. And just as you are not apart from your hands and feet, God is not apart from finite things. And just as there is no you without your body parts, there is no God without finite things.

.and explain to me why you think logic and reason are all that is required for Enlightenment and the Truth . Arent they grounded by our ignorance/partial knowledge and understanding .

Ignorance results from a lack of application of reason. Nothing is beyond the reach of reason. It can deal with both the finite and the Infinite.

[emma]

I wrote:
There are things which we feel to be right.....and they are just so.

KS
How do you know that what you feel is right?

For example, let's say you feel thirsty. How do you know you are thirsty?

You are thirsty because you feel thirsty. That's reason.

ergo there is God because I feel God and you cannot prove me incorrect

KS
There is no Infinite apart from finite things. For that reason there can be no separate "God".

Emma
What does "there is no infinite apart from finite things" actuially mean?

KS
Finite things are the body of the Infinite.

In the same way that you have hands and feet, God has finite things. And just as you are not apart from your hands and feet, God is not apart from finite things. And just as there is no you without your body parts, there is no God without finite things.

Prove this

Emma
.and explain to me why you think logic and reason are all that is required for Enlightenment and the Truth . Arent they grounded by our ignorance/partial knowledge and understanding .

KS
Ignorance results from a lack of application of reason. Nothing is beyond the reach of reason. It can deal with both the finite and the Infinite.

How does reason deal with the Infinite
It seems to me your God is reason whilst mine is God .and you know what God said about having false Gods
I don't think its arrogance on your part, more like ignorance. The human mind has limits, a leap of faith which by your arguments is not rational, extends those limits .

BTW Love requires both emotion and reason in order to survive , the passion and the understanding .bit like God really

[Kevin Solway]

ergo there is God because I feel God and you cannot prove me incorrect

My point is that whatever it is you feel, and call "God" is meaningless to me. So whenever you talk about God, what you say doesn't mean anything to me, so there's no point in my reading your posts.

Finite things are the body of the Infinite.
In the same way that you have hands and feet, God has finite things. And just as you are not apart from your hands and feet, God is not apart from finite things. And just as there is no you without your body parts, there is no God without finite things.

Prove this

I've explained previously that I define God to be the Totality of all things. Since God is the Totality of all things, all things are part of God, literally.

The bread really is the flesh of God.

How does reason deal with the Infinite

In the same way that it deals with everything else.

It seems to me your God is reason whilst mine is God.

No, I've defined God to be the Totality. The All.

[emma]

No, I've defined God to be the Totality. The All.

Yes got that Kevin, but even though it does not mean anything to me I still read your posts .....

Seems like you are unconscious when you consider what is GOD ie this Totality ...It is not rational to consider a God that plays no role in our lives and just becomes another word for Totality ..........unless you accept that bad words/thoughts/deeds travelling out towards the Totality return to haunt the speaker/thinker/doer so therefore (Do unto Others that which etc )

[emma]

Well actually I may have been hasty (one of my faults ) God is the Totality, I can accept this but ho does this fit in with "passion and feeling" which according to Kierkegaard are necessary to be in touch with God and how does such a concept impact on our lives?

[Kevin Solway]

It is not rational to consider a God that plays no role in our lives

God is our lives. Quite literally. So he does a lot more than merely play a role in it.

..unless you accept that bad words/thoughts/deeds travelling out towards the Totality return to haunt the speaker/thinker/doer so therefore (Do unto Others that which etc )

Cause and effect is a law of the Universe.

If you harm someone, they get harmed. That's cause and effect. It can also be called reincarnation.

When you harm someone you are really harming yourself.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

KS: You are thirsty because you feel thirsty.

emma: there is God because I feel God

This is the most baffling use of the word God I've ever seen. The grandest metaphysical concept been completely reduced to something akin to thirst. Since I believe that most people have similar feelings and needs, but use an atheist vocabulary, what might this "God" feeling be, in my terms? Is it something similar to "happy"?

[emma]

KS I think what you describe is the Tao . beware of chinese peddlars Ebay is full of them and taoism was reputed to have been used to keep the plebs in check

:
KS: You are thirsty because you feel thirsty.

emma: there is God because I feel God

Mooke
This is the most baffling use of the word God I've ever seen. The grandest metaphysical concept been completely reduced to something akin to thirst. Since I believe that most people have similar feelings and needs, but use an atheist vocabulary, what might this "God" feeling be, in my terms? Is it something similar to "happy"?

No , as Kierkegaard ably pointed out belief in God is a subjective thing, not to be reasoned thro objectively.
God exists, many do not feel God,many deny God ... I feel God therefore God exists for me. because I believe in God and serve God God does not close his mind to me but scrutinises my every thought/word/deed...........which is why believing in God is very difficult at times