Philosophy Now Forum

.





A few days ago a bird hit one of the large sliding glass doors at the gym that I pray in.


I stepped outside and sat, sort of leaning upon a short ledge, about 12 inches from the bird itself.

I formed a sort-of half circle lounged around the unusual feathered pile.

At first I thought the bird was dead. Then I noticed a shallow breath & it's eyelids were moving slightly. I was certain it had a broken neck.


I just sat there.

I did not touch it. I really didn't even move.

15 maybe 20 minutes passed.


The bird eventually gathered itself and flew onto the trunk of a tree that was perhaps 7 feet away. It was then I realized that the bird was actually a type of woodpecker.


I wonder if our relationship to self-consciousness is somewhat a similar metaphor.


Ouspensky always claimed that higher consciousness already exists for us. In a perfect state.


And that we just need to adjust ourselves to experience it. To come to.



Frogs have evolved to where much of it's thought processing happens within it's eyes not in it's brain.

Looking at a human as being a factory of sorts we relate much of our processing within our brains.

We do that rightly or wrongly.


Consciousness; self-consciousness may have nothing directly to do with our brain functioning; our processing.

Self-consciousness might just come based upon unrelated or as yet undetectable reality that we might necessarily be blind to.


Occasionally, some of us just, come to.






............................................







.

We need a good metaphor for consciousness. I will throw mine in. I think I can do better.

Imagine you have an outer body experience and wind up in someone else's body, you can hear all their thoughts and feelings, sense every sensation that they sense. You start to somehow believe you are that person. But you have no control over a single thought or action that happens. It's like that.

.



Spot on.


A fellow member replying to this rather older thread is a real treat for me.


Love this thread & I particularly enjoyed your direct and powerful metaphor...what if your metaphor is actually not a metaphor?


What if that scenario is what we are living but we are too attached to the drama to see this?





.......................................







.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:...
Frogs have evolved to where much of it's thought processing happens within it's eyes not in it's brain. ...

Eyes are of the 'brain', they are a neuronal outgrowth of the CNS.

.








Not sure that human eyes are considered a direct part of the central nervous system...according to wiki.



.............................................



But perhaps in the way you view the world or the words that you use; the definitions you choose, eyes ARE part of the central nervous system. That is fine. I accept that.



....................................................





That's cool...I think you have been through a lot lately. I respect you and I wish you nothing but the best in your life...your real life.





.

Eyes are the brain, that's all you need to know

Symantic arguments pervade all philosophical debates, because words are the tools we have to unlock meanings and we all have different definitions of each and every word. If philosophy took a more scientific approach to words, and some deeper consensus on the meaning of some of the key words, we could bring this energy loss down because we would have a more fixed points of reference to work off.

The triumph of science is that they have been able to do this, by determining a fixed nominal value for X, extrapolating Y and Z is possible. Imagine a field where X, Y and Z are all written in the sky and try to make similar progress in ascertaining their relationships. That what the field of philosophy tries to do in reconciling assumptions with others. While there is only vague consensus on key words, probably what we can do is to acknowledge that words are like clouds that describe meanings, they are hazy and moving, they cling to meanings, they are approximations.

I showed my irritation of the "eyes are of the brain" post because it failed to address the issue and perhaps distracted from the issue, and then I tried to illustrate how we frequently miss the point because we are so easily distanced from meanings by the inherent cloudiness of language. I don't know how much more there is to say about consciousness because we seem to be in the same cloud on this, but there is a lot to say on the relationship between language and meaning that is more appropriate as a topic of it's own.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.Not sure that human eyes are considered a direct part of the central nervous system...according to wiki.

I accept that I think of the eye as mainly the retina and not the watery bit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10885/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/r/retina.htm

But perhaps in the way you view the world or the words that you use; the definitions you choose, eyes ARE part of the central nervous system. That is fine. I accept that.

That'll be because the retina is an outgrowth of the CNS.

That's cool...I think you have been through a lot lately. I respect you and I wish you nothing but the best in your life...your real life.

KMA.

.




.............................................




Not sure what you are trying to say but again, the eyes are not part of the central nervous system.




wiki -Central Nervous System







...you're welcome.

.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:..
...you're welcome.

wiki wrote:...
In vertebrate embryonic development, the retina and the optic nerve originate as outgrowths of the developing brain, so the retina is considered part of the central nervous system (CNS) and is actually brain tissue.[1][2] It is the only part of the CNS that can be visualized non-invasively. ...

My pleasure.

Hiddenfortress wrote:We need a good metaphor for consciousness. I will throw mine in. I think I can do better.

Imagine you have an outer body experience and wind up in someone else's body, you can hear all their thoughts and feelings, sense every sensation that they sense. You start to somehow believe you are that person. But you have no control over a single thought or action that happens. It's like that.

Not that good a metaphor as it ignores that somehow you have a large amount of control over the thoughts and actions of this others body?

.





......................................

.....................................Central Nervous System



...sorry, just not seeing it. As I said before - if that's your bag go for it.











Think you are referring to the Autonomic nervous system:




.........................................




No biggie. It's easy to get the two confused...









.........................................................





.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:. ...sorry, just not seeing it. As I said before - if that's your bag go for it.[/size]

And thats the problem with seeing piccy's, they don't tell all the story. Try reading sometime. Like I said, I consider the retina a part of the eye and this is an outgrowth of the CNS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina
http://www.cns.nyu.edu/~david/courses/p ... etina.html
http://www.answers.com/Q/What_does_the_retina_do

Think you are referring to the Autonomic nervous system:

I think you mean the peripheral nervous system and you're right it does not deal with the retina, are you claiming the retina is not a part of the eye?

You really don't bother to read the links you send do you. Take a look at the visual part and see what the ANS deals with with respect to the eye. You remind me of NEET students I used to teach in that you think that to goggle and wiki is the same as learning and understanding.

No biggie. It's easy to get the two confused...

Not if one is referring to the retinal aspects of the eye it isn't.

.




I think you are confused...but that's Okay.







.........................................................




If you think the eye or the retina or whatever is part of the central nervous system go for it.




Let's try to focus upon the channeled perspective of this extremely successful philosophical thread.



.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:I think you are confused...but that's Okay.

I think you a gnu and thats fine with you.

If you think the eye or the retina or whatever is part of the central nervous system go for it.

Know bill know.

Let's try to focus upon the channeled perspective of this extremely successful philosophical thread.[/size].

NPD
Megalomania
Paranoid_schizophrenia