Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:43 pm
I think I was puzzled by the 'reimaging' idea as if what happens in our bodies is a simulation of physical existence then it, to my thought, means it does not necessarily have to be what the 'it' is but if it's an emulation then it is what it is, if that makes sense?
I take the blame for that confusion. "Reimaging," was not the best word. Remember, my premise is that the physical is what we are directly conscious of (perceive), and all that we can perceive. To explain why that is true even of dreams, imagination, and hallucinations, since the such perceptions cannot be perceptions of sensory "data" provided by the external and internal neurological systems, they must be provided by sensory "data" stored in memory (the physical brain). At the very beginning of my discussion I pointed out that it is impossible for someone to imagine or dream an apple if they have never seen one.
Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:43 pm
I'm also puzzled how you have perception as consciousness by dint of this body but consciousness not physically explicable?
The "body" provides the means of perception, but cannot produce the conscious perception itself. I might be able to illustrate this using sight as an example.
Physiologically, sight begins with the eyes which, by means of the eyes' lenses, focus a miniature image of the scene we are looking at (though upside down) on the retinas. The rods and cones of the retinas stimulated by the light focused on them transmit the visual information of that image by means of the optic nerves to the visual cortex of the brain.
Neurologists have successfully analyzed many of the events in the brain related to vision. There is a fairly good description of that
here, and another
here, if you are interested. One thing to notice is that all processing of visual information consists of a multitude of separate events, none of which describes or explains the actual conscious experience we call seeing.
Obviously, it is the physical neurological system that makes vision (and all other perceptions) available to consciousness, but those physiological processes are not consciousness itself. In the case of vision, the fact that those process are a multitude of separate events at the physical level, and the fact that our conscious vision is a single phenomenon means they are not the same thing.
Please see my short article, "
The Nature of Consciousness" for a complete explanation of why consciousness can neither be explained or described physically.
I appreciate the questions. I hope I've answered them, or at least have explained why these are my views.
Randy
