Bart wrote:I think there is a gradient of consciousness..
Will wrote:Bart wrote:I think there is a gradient of consciousness..
Bart, Emphatically yes, in my view the exploration of consciousness is a wide open space for exploration containing many gradients. As with any explorer moving into an explored universe it is useful (in my quite limited experience), to rely on such prior experience as may seem useful; and to begin identifying and naming recognizable landmarks, so I can remember where I've been. In beginning an exploration of consciousness, it may be sufficient for some to say this is mine, I know where I am, and everything is arm and fuzzy. If changes to my consciousness occur, the ok, great I'll float along and see where I end up next. This is a perfectly fine, comfortable and livable way.
Others may wish to develop a more detailed concept of the consciousness universe; and will full move from around it, as the need or desire arises. I am more of exploring and moving willfully about. Hence, developing recognizable conceptual landmarks is useful. Pls note that I in no way understand that my own explorations and landmarks in any way represent the truth; or that really is such a thing as aesthetic or conceptual consciousness. These are only names that I (and perhaps others) find useful in navigating a willfully chosen journey through this sea of consciousness through many of us, rather amoeba like, make or way from ephemeral moment to the next.
Nor am I saying that it is n either or description. While I may strive for a more (or mostly) conceptual consciousness while driving; and a more aesthetic while walking in the woods, I rarely achieve a fully pure consciousness doing either. Further, as a good druid and an avowed triphiliac, two identifiable land marks (or recognizable directions, or reference indices) are insufficient to allow navigation through the full universe of consciousness. To grasp the full scope of possible locations within the great sea of consciousness, I must identify three "landmarks; and they must be sufficiently "orthogonal". Three landmarks or reference points that all lie in the same place may describe a comfortably well known niche; but they fail to support exploration and navigation through the greater ocean.
At the moment, I can posit two land marks in the great ocean called consciousness: aesthetic and conceptual. I am not sure I concur with the names, but only note they are names used bu others. I've not "tested" these two as pair to determine if they lead in and describe fully independent spaces within the ocean of consciousness; nor begun to identify a third, except to notionally know (after the myth of Tailtiu and philosophy of CS Peirce) that there is a third. Perhaps spiritual consciousness?. But is that sufficiently orthogonal to both conceptual and aesthetic. Or maybe all three get trashed out; and entirely other trine proves more useful. Again, I do not try to disclose the truth of consciousness's great sea; only to identify a few familiar stars to me help me navigate through one explorer's journey.
Of course, nothing restricts any other consciousness to navigate by my stars as they not determine the true structure consciousness. Nor must I or any other stick to a true course aligned to ant single direction, star or landmark; unless by choice. Nor must any even choose to navigate; both pelagic drifting and littoral residency prove quite nourishing and successful journeys through the great sea.
Gradients there are. Many, In all directions. Enjoy the ride.
Just a thought, Will
Bart wrote:Please be aware you are posting in the skeptical druid. I love to see scientific proof.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests