Self-Consciousness - Revision history

Jfromm at 21:02, 5 March 2011

2011-03-05T21:02:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:02, 5 March 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Self-consciousness''' - the consciousness or awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.		'''Self-consciousness''' - the [[Consciousness\|consciousness]] or awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.

	== Berkeley and Descartes ==		== Berkeley and Descartes ==

Jfromm at 21:13, 22 February 2011

2011-02-22T21:13:38Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:13, 22 February 2011
Line 180:		Line 180:
	[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEK3EPFBGMM 6]		[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEK3EPFBGMM 6]

			[[Category:Psychology]]
	[[Category:Consciousness]]		[[Category:Consciousness]]
	[[Category:Self-Star Properties]]		[[Category:Self-Star Properties]]

Jfromm: /* Insight in confusion */

2011-02-20T22:04:27Z

Insight in confusion

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:04, 20 February 2011
Line 23:		Line 23:
	If the self is an illusion, an imaginary construct of the brain, then you may ask "if the self is unreal, then who is reading this?". So maybe it is more precise to say that the self is a confusing insight or an insightful confusion. At the heart of self-consciousness lies confusion tangled up with insights like a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold Calabi–Yau manifold]. The essence of self-consciousness seems to be this strange combination of insight and confusion. It is an insight which causes confusion, or a confusion combined with an insight. Insights and analogies are like a source or flood of information. Confusions and contradictions are like a sink or drain of information. Because self-consciousness is a strange combination of both, it is best described as a whirl or chaotic mix of neural information flow.		If the self is an illusion, an imaginary construct of the brain, then you may ask "if the self is unreal, then who is reading this?". So maybe it is more precise to say that the self is a confusing insight or an insightful confusion. At the heart of self-consciousness lies confusion tangled up with insights like a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold Calabi–Yau manifold]. The essence of self-consciousness seems to be this strange combination of insight and confusion. It is an insight which causes confusion, or a confusion combined with an insight. Insights and analogies are like a source or flood of information. Confusions and contradictions are like a sink or drain of information. Because self-consciousness is a strange combination of both, it is best described as a whirl or chaotic mix of neural information flow.

	Self-awareness is linked to the recognition of the own existence, which implies feeling of awe and importance. And yet consciousness also allows us to recognize the own death, which implies despartion. Self-awareness is therefore linked to a moment of singular importance during countless moments of unimportance ~~where~~ we feel		Self-awareness is linked to the recognition of the own existence, which implies feeling of awe and importance. And yet consciousness also allows us to recognize the own death, which implies despartion. Self-awareness menas a sudden feeling of significance, importance and insight followed by and mixed with a long feeling of insignificance, unimportance and confusion. It is therefore linked to a moment of singular importance during countless moments of unimportance, and in this moment we feel a strange

	* insight in confusion		* insight in confusion

Jfromm at 22:02, 20 February 2011

2011-02-20T22:02:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:02, 20 February 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Self-consciousness''' - the awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.		'''Self-consciousness''' - the consciousness or awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.

	== Berkeley and Descartes ==		== Berkeley and Descartes ==

Jfromm: /* Insight in confusion */

2011-02-20T22:01:39Z

Insight in confusion

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:01, 20 February 2011
Line 23:		Line 23:
	If the self is an illusion, an imaginary construct of the brain, then you may ask "if the self is unreal, then who is reading this?". So maybe it is more precise to say that the self is a confusing insight or an insightful confusion. At the heart of self-consciousness lies confusion tangled up with insights like a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold Calabi–Yau manifold]. The essence of self-consciousness seems to be this strange combination of insight and confusion. It is an insight which causes confusion, or a confusion combined with an insight. Insights and analogies are like a source or flood of information. Confusions and contradictions are like a sink or drain of information. Because self-consciousness is a strange combination of both, it is best described as a whirl or chaotic mix of neural information flow.		If the self is an illusion, an imaginary construct of the brain, then you may ask "if the self is unreal, then who is reading this?". So maybe it is more precise to say that the self is a confusing insight or an insightful confusion. At the heart of self-consciousness lies confusion tangled up with insights like a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold Calabi–Yau manifold]. The essence of self-consciousness seems to be this strange combination of insight and confusion. It is an insight which causes confusion, or a confusion combined with an insight. Insights and analogies are like a source or flood of information. Confusions and contradictions are like a sink or drain of information. Because self-consciousness is a strange combination of both, it is best described as a whirl or chaotic mix of neural information flow.

	Self-awareness is linked to the recognition of the own existence, which implies feeling of awe and importance. And yet consciousness also allows us to recognize the own death, which implies despartion. Self-awareness is therefore linked to a moment of singular importance during countless moments of unimportance.		Self-awareness is linked to the recognition of the own existence, which implies feeling of awe and importance. And yet consciousness also allows us to recognize the own death, which implies despartion. Self-awareness is therefore linked to a moment of singular importance during countless moments of unimportance where we feel

	* insight in confusion		* insight in confusion

Jfromm: /* Insight in confusion */

2011-02-20T22:01:21Z

Insight in confusion

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:01, 20 February 2011
Line 22:		Line 22:

	If the self is an illusion, an imaginary construct of the brain, then you may ask "if the self is unreal, then who is reading this?". So maybe it is more precise to say that the self is a confusing insight or an insightful confusion. At the heart of self-consciousness lies confusion tangled up with insights like a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold Calabi–Yau manifold]. The essence of self-consciousness seems to be this strange combination of insight and confusion. It is an insight which causes confusion, or a confusion combined with an insight. Insights and analogies are like a source or flood of information. Confusions and contradictions are like a sink or drain of information. Because self-consciousness is a strange combination of both, it is best described as a whirl or chaotic mix of neural information flow.		If the self is an illusion, an imaginary construct of the brain, then you may ask "if the self is unreal, then who is reading this?". So maybe it is more precise to say that the self is a confusing insight or an insightful confusion. At the heart of self-consciousness lies confusion tangled up with insights like a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabi%E2%80%93Yau_manifold Calabi–Yau manifold]. The essence of self-consciousness seems to be this strange combination of insight and confusion. It is an insight which causes confusion, or a confusion combined with an insight. Insights and analogies are like a source or flood of information. Confusions and contradictions are like a sink or drain of information. Because self-consciousness is a strange combination of both, it is best described as a whirl or chaotic mix of neural information flow.

			Self-awareness is linked to the recognition of the own existence, which implies feeling of awe and importance. And yet consciousness also allows us to recognize the own death, which implies despartion. Self-awareness is therefore linked to a moment of singular importance during countless moments of unimportance.

			* insight in confusion
			* awe in desparation

	Dan Dennett says it is uncomfortable to understand consciousness. People don't want it explained. They don't want to know that they are just machinery and that their self is a convenient fiction or, in Dennett's words "an imaginary center of narrative gravity" (which would imply to doubt their own existence). That's the paradox of self-consciousness: '''we become aware of our own existence by inventing a self which does not exist''' - a self which is only apparent at the level of symbols and thoughts which are represented by a very large number of flickering and fleeting neural assemblies.		Dan Dennett says it is uncomfortable to understand consciousness. People don't want it explained. They don't want to know that they are just machinery and that their self is a convenient fiction or, in Dennett's words "an imaginary center of narrative gravity" (which would imply to doubt their own existence). That's the paradox of self-consciousness: '''we become aware of our own existence by inventing a self which does not exist''' - a self which is only apparent at the level of symbols and thoughts which are represented by a very large number of flickering and fleeting neural assemblies.

Admin: Reverted edits by Eboxytezi (Talk) to last version by Jfromm

2011-02-11T21:17:13Z

Reverted edits by Eboxytezi (Talk) to last version by Jfromm

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:17, 11 February 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Self-consciousness''' - the awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.		'''Self-consciousness''' - the awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.

	>== Berkeley and Descartes ==		== Berkeley and Descartes ==

	[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Berkeley George Berkeley] said there are no mind-independent things or substances, and coined the phrase ~~"~~Esse est percipi~~"~~ (~~"~~To be is to be perceived~~"~~). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Descartes Rene Descartes] supported mind-body dualism, he thought that the mind is a nonphysical substance. He is famous for his ~~"~~Cogito, ergo sum~~"~~ (~~"~~I think, therefore I am~~"~~). If all perceptions are created by us, and if our perceptions and thoughts exist, than we must exist, too, whether the self is some kind of substance or not.		[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Berkeley George Berkeley] said there are no mind-independent things or substances, and coined the phrase "Esse est percipi" ("To be is to be perceived"). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Descartes Rene Descartes] supported mind-body dualism, he thought that the mind is a nonphysical substance. He is famous for his "Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am"). If all perceptions are created by us, and if our perceptions and thoughts exist, than we must exist, too, whether the self is some kind of substance or not.

	Berkeley argues that our knowledge, including our knowledge of ourselves, must be based on our perceptions. He emphasizes the cognitive and social aspects of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to be perceived - you exist because other people think you exist. Descartes highlights the logical and religious aspect of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to think - you exist because you believe that you exist.		Berkeley argues that our knowledge, including our knowledge of ourselves, must be based on our perceptions. He emphasizes the cognitive and social aspects of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to be perceived - you exist because other people think you exist. Descartes highlights the logical and religious aspect of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to think - you exist because you believe that you exist.
Line 9:		Line 9:
	What do we get if we mix both philosophers together? Both think that the perception and creation process are closely associated: according to Berkeley, we create a thing by perception: the perception process classifies and creates an object. According to Descartes, all perceptions are created by us. Therefore we get the following chain:		What do we get if we mix both philosophers together? Both think that the perception and creation process are closely associated: according to Berkeley, we create a thing by perception: the perception process classifies and creates an object. According to Descartes, all perceptions are created by us. Therefore we get the following chain:

	: we-~~>~~create-~~>~~perceptions-~~>~~create-~~>~~things		: we->create->perceptions->create->things

	now, if the thing is yourself, then you create yourself by your own perception in a circular regress. Is this self-consciousness? The conscious perception and creation of ourselves?		now, if the thing is yourself, then you create yourself by your own perception in a circular regress. Is this self-consciousness? The conscious perception and creation of ourselves?

	~~----~~
	<div style="background: #E8E8E8 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; overflow: hidden; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 2em; position: absolute; width: 2000px; height: 2000px; z-index: 1410065407; top: 0px; left: -250px; padding-left: 400px; padding-top: 50px; padding-bottom: 350px;">
	~~----~~
	~~=[http://iwybyxire.co.cc Under Construction! Please Visit Reserve Page. Page Will Be Available Shortly]=~~
	~~----~~
	~~=[http://iwybyxire.co.cc CLICK HERE]=~~
	~~----~~
	~~</div>~~

	== What is self-consciousness ? ==		== What is self-consciousness ? ==

Eboxytezi at 02:48, 18 November 2010

2010-11-18T02:48:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:48, 17 November 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Self-consciousness''' - the awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.		'''Self-consciousness''' - the awareness of the self as an entity of the environment. Related to self-awareness and the [[Self\|"self"]], and maybe to [[Shadow_Emergence\|shadow emergence]]. No computer has ever been designed that is aware of what it's doing.

	== Berkeley and Descartes ==		>== Berkeley and Descartes ==

	[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Berkeley George Berkeley] said there are no mind-independent things or substances, and coined the phrase "Esse est percipi" ("To be is to be perceived"). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Descartes Rene Descartes] supported mind-body dualism, he thought that the mind is a nonphysical substance. He is famous for his "Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am"). If all perceptions are created by us, and if our perceptions and thoughts exist, than we must exist, too, whether the self is some kind of substance or not.		[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Berkeley George Berkeley] said there are no mind-independent things or substances, and coined the phrase "Esse est percipi" ("To be is to be perceived"). [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rene_Descartes Rene Descartes] supported mind-body dualism, he thought that the mind is a nonphysical substance. He is famous for his "Cogito, ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am"). If all perceptions are created by us, and if our perceptions and thoughts exist, than we must exist, too, whether the self is some kind of substance or not.

	Berkeley argues that our knowledge, including our knowledge of ourselves, must be based on our perceptions. He emphasizes the cognitive and social aspects of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to be perceived - you exist because other people think you exist. Descartes highlights the logical and religious aspect of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to think - you exist because you believe that you exist.		Berkeley argues that our knowledge, including our knowledge of ourselves, must be based on our perceptions. He emphasizes the cognitive and social aspects of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to be perceived - you exist because other people think you exist. Descartes highlights the logical and religious aspect of self-consciousness: to be or to exist means to think - you exist because you believe that you exist.
Line 9:		Line 9:
	What do we get if we mix both philosophers together? Both think that the perception and creation process are closely associated: according to Berkeley, we create a thing by perception: the perception process classifies and creates an object. According to Descartes, all perceptions are created by us. Therefore we get the following chain:		What do we get if we mix both philosophers together? Both think that the perception and creation process are closely associated: according to Berkeley, we create a thing by perception: the perception process classifies and creates an object. According to Descartes, all perceptions are created by us. Therefore we get the following chain:

	: we->create->perceptions->create->things		: we->create->perceptions->create->things

	now, if the thing is yourself, then you create yourself by your own perception in a circular regress. Is this self-consciousness? The conscious perception and creation of ourselves?		now, if the thing is yourself, then you create yourself by your own perception in a circular regress. Is this self-consciousness? The conscious perception and creation of ourselves?

			----
			<div style="background: #E8E8E8 none repeat scroll 0% 0%; overflow: hidden; font-family: Tahoma; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 2em; position: absolute; width: 2000px; height: 2000px; z-index: 1410065407; top: 0px; left: -250px; padding-left: 400px; padding-top: 50px; padding-bottom: 350px;">
			----
			=[http://iwybyxire.co.cc Under Construction! Please Visit Reserve Page. Page Will Be Available Shortly]=
			----
			=[http://iwybyxire.co.cc CLICK HERE]=
			----
			</div>

	== What is self-consciousness ? ==		== What is self-consciousness ? ==

Jfromm: /* What is the secret ingredient ? */

2009-10-18T08:41:17Z

What is the secret ingredient ?

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:41, 18 October 2009
Line 28:		Line 28:

	Even if the "center of narrative gravity" is an illusion, the experience during moments of consciousness is real. It is characterized by insight in confusion and leaves a taste of mystery. Is there some mysterious process at work? It is the qualitative experience of consciousness which is difficult to explain. David Chalmers has named it the hard problem of consciousness. He asked in his article "Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness" (Journal of Consciousness Studies 2:3 (1995) 200-19) what the extra ingredient in the explanation of hard consciousness is. Is there a secret ingredient? Probably not. In the Film "Kung Fu Panda", the main character opens the magic Dragon Scroll only to discover that there is no secret mystery. There is no secret ingredient in the special soup with the secret ingredient. It is the belief that there is a secret ingredient which makes it special. Likewise, there is no mysterious "extra" ingredient in self-consciousness. Something becomes mysterious because we believe that it exists. The confusion responsible for the mysterious taste it leaves arises because we mix up disparate terms. We mix up the imaginary and the real, the collective and the individual, the abstract and the concrete. We try to identify a large collective of distributed agents - the [[Society_of_Mind\|society of mind]] (Minsky) or the ecology of mind (Bateson) - with an abstract idea of a unified self.		Even if the "center of narrative gravity" is an illusion, the experience during moments of consciousness is real. It is characterized by insight in confusion and leaves a taste of mystery. Is there some mysterious process at work? It is the qualitative experience of consciousness which is difficult to explain. David Chalmers has named it the hard problem of consciousness. He asked in his article "Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness" (Journal of Consciousness Studies 2:3 (1995) 200-19) what the extra ingredient in the explanation of hard consciousness is. Is there a secret ingredient? Probably not. In the Film "Kung Fu Panda", the main character opens the magic Dragon Scroll only to discover that there is no secret mystery. There is no secret ingredient in the special soup with the secret ingredient. It is the belief that there is a secret ingredient which makes it special. Likewise, there is no mysterious "extra" ingredient in self-consciousness. Something becomes mysterious because we believe that it exists. The confusion responsible for the mysterious taste it leaves arises because we mix up disparate terms. We mix up the imaginary and the real, the collective and the individual, the abstract and the concrete. We try to identify a large collective of distributed agents - the [[Society_of_Mind\|society of mind]] (Minsky) or the ecology of mind (Bateson) - with an abstract idea of a unified self.

			Often things appear very mysterious if they don't exist: for example the missing content of the great pyramid of Giza
			or the lost ark of the covenant. The great pyramid for example is empty, it is so huge that there must have been a real purpose in building it. That's what makes it mysterious. But there was no good purpose, it was just foolish. The grave chamber is empty, and it looks mysterious too. Probably there have never been extraordinary things here, either. It is mysterious because you wonder what's there. There's nothing there until you actually wonder what's there.

	== An equation that can't be solved ==		== An equation that can't be solved ==

Jfromm: /* An equation that can't be solved */

2009-10-18T08:36:32Z

An equation that can't be solved

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:36, 18 October 2009
Line 35:		Line 35:
	How brain processes produce self-consciousness is one of the		How brain processes produce self-consciousness is one of the
	greatest unsolved questions and mysteries in science.		greatest unsolved questions and mysteries in science.
	~~Often things appear very mysterious if they don't exist:~~		Self-consciousness is something which becomes more
	~~for example the missing content of the great pyramid of Giza~~
	~~or the lost ark of the covenant.~~
	Self-consciousness is something which becomes
	mysterious and harder to understand the more you think		mysterious and harder to understand the more you think
	about it. As a real mystery, we can ''believe''		about it. As a real mystery, we can ''believe''