The last one to post in this thread wins!!

[Infinity666]

blah blah blah your in the matrix

[sytaylor]

I haven't heard from anyone in my team for nearly two days (I work alone on a different floor, surrounded by funky people I used to work with)... I mean I don't mind my postcount has been helped by it... but still. Bit weird.

[Infinity666]

huh?

[Capt. Picard]

huh? x2

[sytaylor]

My thoughts exactly, but it means I'm being paid (quite well I might add) to sit here and surf.

[Infinity666]

Wait wtf is going on?? your getting paid?? huh im confused

[SLippe]

http://www.slippe.com/images/fight2.gif

[sytaylor]

Yeah I'm getting paid, I work :p

[Infinity666]

nevermind, I think I understand

[zer0]

http://www.pinoypc.net/uploads/smiles-jp_boxing.gif

[Capt. Picard]

I only understand the I am part. You must be because you can't be nothing.

[sytaylor]

Braincells.

[Capt. Picard]

From another forumHi Regi. everyone,

There is a profound error in the question "Why do we have consciousness" dear Master.

Who is the "We" the "has" consciousness, like a possession or attribute?

If I say, "I have consciousness", who is "I" ?

A person is not their body. When someone loses a limb or organ, they don't change the person we recognise them as being. "I" that I recognise as myself, is the sum total of all of consciousness, and it is this I express and display by my actions. It is from my actions, (which include language and things spoken) that others recognise - or fail to - the person , the "I" that I am.

This is what Rand meant, I think, with her statement, "Before one can say "I love you" to anyone, one must first be able to say the "I" ".

To ask, why do I have consciousness is to ask "why do I have me". It's redundant. It just is, without any why.

The question that has been tackled by philosophies down the ages, and I include religions here, is to answer the questions, "where did my consciousness ( I ) come from, what am I supposed to do now I'm here"

Grasshopper apologises for hurling an accusation of redunancy at Illustrious Master (-:

(but is a wee bit gleeful)

Regards,

Cass

[Capt. Picard]

00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsidGlobal_DataAccess_MSRD O20DLL_r5.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Type Lib\{EE008642-64A8-11CE-920F-08002B369A33}\2.0\0\win32[#GlobalDa.BFA7.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE2 4]Global_DataAccess_MSRDO20DLL_r50.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D 2_B980_006097C4DE24Interface\{5E71F04F-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsid32Global_DataAccess_MS RDO20DLL_r51.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24I nterface\{5E71F04F-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\TypeLibGlobal_DataAccess_MSRDO20DLL_ r52.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Global_Dat aAccess_MSRDO20DLL_r53.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006 097C4DE24Interface\{8B39DFBF-3647-11CF-814A-00AA00A40C25}rdoResultsetEventsGlobal_DataAccess_M SRDO20DLL_r54.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24 Interface\{8B39DFBF-3647-11CF-814A-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsidGlobal_DataAccess_MSRD O20DLL_r55.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Int erface\{8B39DFBF-3647-11CF-814A-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsid32Global_DataAccess_MS RDO20DLL_r56.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24I nterface\{8B39DFBF-3647-11CF-814A-00AA00A40C25}\TypeLibGlobal_DataAccess_MSRDO20DLL_ r57.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Global_Dat aAccess_MSRDO20DLL_r58.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006 097C4DE24Interface\{5E71F050-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}rdoPreparedStatementGlobal_DataAccess _MSRDO20DLL_r59.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE 24Interface\{5E71F050-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsidGlobal_DataAccess_MSRD O20DLL_r6.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Type Lib\{EE008642-64A8-11CE-920F-08002B369A33}\2.0\HELPDIRGlobal_DataAccess_MSRDO20 DLL_r60.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Interf ace\{5E71F050-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsid32Global_DataAccess_MS RDO20DLL_r61.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24I nterface\{5E71F050-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\TypeLibGlobal_DataAccess_MSRDO20DLL_ r62.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Global_Dat aAccess_MSRDO20DLL_r63.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006 097C4DE24Interface\{5E71F051-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}_rdoEnvironmentGlobal_DataAccess_MSRD O20DLL_r64.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Int erface\{5E71F051-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsidGlobal_DataAccess_MSRD O20DLL_r65.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Int erface\{5E71F051-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsid32Global_DataAccess_MS RDO20DLL_r66.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24I nterface\{5E71F051-551F-11CF-8152-00AA00A40C25}\TypeLibGlobal_DataAccess_MSRDO20DLL_ r67.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE24Global_Dat aAccess_MSRDO20DLL_r68.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006 097C4DE24Interface\{8B39DFBC-3647-11CF-814A-00AA00A40C25}rdoEnvironmentEventsGlobal_DataAccess _MSRDO20DLL_r69.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_006097C4DE 24Interface\{8B39DFBC-3647-11CF-814A-00AA00A40C25}\ProxyStubClsidGlobal_DataAccess_MSRD O20DLL_r7.7EBEDD31_AA66_11D2_B980_00

[Capt. Picard]

How was that for SPAM ^^

[Capt. Picard]

From that same forumFirst, I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to respond on this thread so far, because every response so far demonstrates two things, we really do know what consciousness is, because every response has been about it, but when we try to say what we mean by consciousness itself, it is so taken for granted, we do not identify it. This phenomena has always puzzled me. I think the explanation is something C.S. Lewis described in his book, Miracles. The reason people are not aware of what the thing itself is which we call consciousness, is because it is like a window we look at the world through--we see the world and know we are seeing it but never notice the window which we take for granted.

Another thing that puzzles me is why it is so difficult to make people know what consciousness itself is. I have tried for years to explain it, and have learned that some people just never understand it, and have come to the conclusion, it is possible such people are really not conscious. The reason I cannot explain it to them is because it would be like explaining what red looks like to someone who cannot see red, because of color-blindness, for example.

I gave that as an example of something to think about in my original post, because it's a clue to what consciousness actually is. Consciousness is the actual perception of what are mistakenly called the senses. Consciousness is the experience of colors as we actually see them, flavors as we actually taste them, sounds as we actually hear them, scents as we actually smell them, textures and temperatures as we actually feel them.

The only way I know to explain what I mean by consciousness itself is by example. The reason is because it is one thing that can only be known ostensively, that is, by actually pointing to it and saying, "I mean that." In the case of consciousness, however, I cannot point to it, because consciousness is a subjective experience that can only be known by actually experiencing it. (Rand used the expression, "introspection," but that term implies more than I intend.) It is that experience I mean by consciousness itself and which I will attempt to identify

I'm going to use four examples, color, taste, temperature, and pain.

Color

There is an illustration used by philosophers and scientist who understand what is meant by consciousness itself, that sometimes helps explain what it means. It is called the "inverted spectrum," to emphasize the subjective nature of consciousness. When two people with normal vision see an object of a certain color, a yellow rose for example, they will agree the color of the rose is yellow. Both are seeing the same color, if we mean, the property of the rose we call yellow, but, if we mean the conscious experience they are having when they see yellow, we cannot know that is the same. What one person consciously perceives, the conscious experience they are having when seeing yellow, might be what another experiences consciously when they perceive green. It does not matter what the actual subjective conscious experience is, so long as one always has the same one when perceiving the same color, whatever people actually subjectively consciously perceive, they will agree on the name of that color objectively.

In fact, two peoples conscious experience of the color spectrum (ROYGBV) might be reversed, and what one consciously perceives (subjectively) when seeing red, might be what someone else consciously perceives (subjectively) when seeing violet. That persons perceptual spectrum might even be reversed (VBGYOR). There is no way to test this or demonstrate it, however, because the experience is totally subjective and can only be known to the individual experiencing it, who can never compare his experience to anyone else's. It is that non-demonstrable subjective experience that I mean by consciousness itself.

Taste

One of the most difficult things to do is to explain what something tastes like to someone who has never tasted it. In fact, if the taste involves flavors another has never experienced, it is impossible to explain it. The flavors of things can only be explained in terms of flavors one has previously experience. There is an old joke in the south of this country (US) that is the stock answer to the question, "what does it taste like," about any of the more bazaar foods they enjoy, such as frog's legs, possum, alligator, or snake; "it tastes kinda like chicken." They don't taste anything like chicken and the joke points out the difficulty of trying to explain the taste of something someone has never tasted.

The difficulty arises from the fact that tastes are a subjective conscious experience that cannot be demonstrated to someone else. There is only one way to actually learn what something tastes like, and that is to taste it. If I want to know what cinnamon tastes like, or licorice, or chocolate, I have to taste them. What I mean by the taste of cinnamon is what I consciously experience, not what the chemical makeup of cinnamon is, or what my olfactory nerves do (because the "taste" of cinnamon is actually a scent), but the subjective conscious experience of the cinnamon taste. It is that subjective conscious experience I mean by consciousness itself.

Cold and Hot

When I say, "this beer is cold," or, "this coffee is hot," how do I know it, and what do I mean? If I am a scientist I might think about molecular motion, but before I could think it, I would fist have to discover if whatever I'm talking about is actually cold or hot, and I do that by "feeling" it. If it is hot I will experience a conscious perception I have learned to call "hot" and which I can distinguish from another conscious perception I call "cold." Because I'm a scientist, I think I can explain what those conscious perceptions of cold and hot are, but I cannot. I can explain the physical state of things that when felt are accompanied by the conscious perception of hot or cold, but the conscious experience itself is not described at all.

Suppose I have three bowls of water, one very hot, one very cold, and one room temperature. If I place one hand in the very hot water, and one hand in the very cold water, I will simultaneously experience hot (associated with one hand) and cold (associated with the other hand). If after a few moments I place both hands in the room temperature water, I will again simultaneously experience hot and cold, but the experience will be associated with the opposite hands. The experience of hot and cold is subjective, and it is that subjective experience I mean by consciousness itself.

Pain

I'm using the example of pain last, because we all know what pain is. Or do we? In medicine, one of the most difficult things to assess is a patient's pain. In fact, it cannot be assessed and doctors have had to devise methods which give them an idea of how much pain patients are experiencing based on their own subjective assessment, because there is no way to measure pain. The reason is obvious enough. Though the centers of the brain that indicate pain and even the amount of activity related to the severity of the pain have been mapped, what the pain "feels like" to the one experiencing it is a subjective experience that can neither be detected or demonstrated. When some describes their pain to someone else, the "someone else" must imagine the other's pain in terms of pain they themselves have experienced.

There is another oddity about pain. There is no attribute of the physical world that is "pain," in the way color, or temperature, or flavors are attributes of physical existents. Although the conscious experience of color, temperature, and flavor is a subjective one, there is a correlation between the physical attributes of things our conscious experience relates to, but there is no such attribute of things our pain relates to, because the physical "thing" our pain is a perception of is a condition of some part of our bodies. But the condition, which can be described (there is a tumor in the bone), it is not pain that is being described, the way red (this wave-length of light is being reflected) is a description of a color.

For almost every other subjective conscious percept, some specific physical attribute, relationship, or event can be found to which it corresponds. Without any teleological implication, all our percepts, with the exception of pain and pleasure, give us information about specific discoverable attributes of physical existence. There are no physical attributes that correspond to the direct subjective conscious experience of pain and pleasure. It is that direct subjective conscious experience I mean by consciousness itself.

I have a great deal more to say about this subject, but think this sufficient to indicate what consciousness itself is. I have only one more remark.

I do not mean this to be the answer to the question, "why are we conscious." However, it is for the sake of consciousness itself that we live. If we were not conscious as I have described it, if it were not for the fact we subjectively consciously see the colors of a gorgeous sunset, hear the music of a grand concerto, feel the warmth of the one we love in our arms, taste the chocolate, or smell the roses, and feel the pleasure of all the beauty of life, there would be no reason to live. Living, for those creatures that have it, is consciously experiencing their own existence and the world they live in. This is the reason Rand referred to consciousness as the soul of man.

In subsequent posts, I'll discuss the relationship between animal and human consciousness, and why it is essentially the same, the relationship of consciousness to instinct, to volition, reason, knowledge, and memory, and why consciousness can never be created.

Regi

[sytaylor]

good carrots.

[Capt. Picard]

Why are crocodiles flat?

Because the flatter, the swimmer. :)

It's an old Afrikaans drinking joke. It doesn't translate very well though. :D

[sytaylor]

Thw simmer?

[Capt. Picard]

It's not suppose to makes sense that's what's funny about it ... when you're drunk.

It does sound funnier in Afrikaans though. Hoe platter hoe swemmer.

[nrs421]

wow this thread has really slowed down

[Capt. Picard]

To drink or not to drink. That is the question.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060516/wl_uk_afp/fblwc2006engbritain_060516162255

British pub industry chiefs have vowed to clamp down on selling more booze to drunken fans roaring on England during the football World Cup.

[Capt. Picard]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060517/ap_on_re_us/road_rage_rankings_1

Cities' Rankings for Road Rage Episodes
1. Miami
2. Phoenix
3. New York
4. Los Angeles
5. Boston
6. Washington/Baltimore
7. Detroit
8. San Diego
9. Houston
10. Philadelphia
11. Dallas/Ft. Worth
12. Denver
13. Chicago
14. Cleveland
15. San Francisco
16. Atlanta
17. Seattle
18. St. Louis
19. Nashville
20. Minneapolis

But this seems to be almost all major cities in America

[nrs421]

Hickory, dickory, dock!
The mouse ran up the clock;
The clock struck one,
The mouse ran down,
Hickory, dickory, dock!

spam! i love spam

[sytaylor]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060517/ap_on_re_us/road_rage_rankings_1



But this seems to be almost all major cities in America

Uhh... they're all in america.