[MD] MD 4th level - The more autonomous level

[Ham Priday]

Arlo --

First, please make sure you have read my latest post to Platt.

Second, it is pointless to explain the source of something to someone who
doesn't believe it exists.  You deny the existence of proprietary awareness
for reasons you have refused to tell me, yet persist in accusing me of not
answering your questions.

[Arlo]:
> I had asked...
> Where does this attribute come from?
> Did my consciousness exist before my birth?
> Would you say a "human being" left at birth on a
> deserted island twenty years later has a
> "consciousness" that is different than the
> "consciousness" of a cat?
> If so, is "consciousness" a feature of human DNA?
> Or is it bestowed on those born "human" by a
> "higher power"?

Actually, I addressed all of these questions in my 12/7 post to you, except
for the first, and whether consciousness is a "feature" of DNA.  The only
motive you can logically have for asking me to identify the source of
proprietary awareness is to acquire additional material with which to attack
me.

But I shall answer it anyway, so as to redeem myself of the charge that I've
evaded your questions.  Let me first say that the questions you have asked
show me that you're in denial; specifically, you are looking at
Consciousness from the outside and resisting the impulse to regard it as
anything but a behavior pattern exhibited by the human species.  That's the
objective view of a positivist, such as John B. Watson who founded the
psychological school of that name.  But you know better than this, because
you have an "inside" view of what consciousness is: you POSSESS it.  What
better confirmation can there be that consciousness is subjective than your
own experience of it?
Previously I said:
> For those who see the logic of a Primary Source,
> the "primary difference" that accounts for relational
> existence is Otherness.  By definition, for an other to
> exist it must be the object of awareness.
> This makes reality subjective.

Twist this axiom 180 degrees, and you will see that for awareness to exist
there must be an "other" for it to be aware of.  The appearance of
"otherness" to awareness is the primary difference responsible for this
created existence.  It is a difference known only to the subjective self,
because to its uncreated source --Essence -- all differentiation is "not
other".  Consciousness is therefore Essence deprived of its beingness.  The
individual subject realizes this beingness as an objective reality apart
from itself.  This division between subject and object carries with it a
kind of affinity or "valence" across the binary division: namely, the Value
of Essence.  Because value is what links man to Essence, it his essential
reality.

This is a truncated version of the complete ontology expounded in my thesis.
I don't expect you to comprehend it in this abbreviated form which I offer
only to demonstrate that I do have an answer to the origin of consciousness.
Your questions concerning the genetic basis of consciousness and its DNA
functions are irrelevant because they presume that conscious awareness is
"produced" by neuro-biological processes.  In fact, the reverse is true; the
brain and nervous system are only instruments of the conscious function.
They, too, belong to the "objective" part of our reality.  Nerves and grey
cells are not the conscious agents -- WE are.

Instead of trying to refute SOM, I suggest that you start with the premise
that reality is SUBJECTIVE, and proceed from there.  I promise you, it will
be a far more enlightening experience.

> [Arlo]
> Consciousness is a continuum, ranging from low-high,
> with humans at the top of the totem. Okay.

Not OK.  Consciousness is NOT a "continuum".  It is a discrete proprietary
capability of the individual.  It is what distinguishes the sentient
organism from all other existents.  The moment you try to build a
"collective" out of consciousness, you lose sight of the principle that
makes man an autonomous agent.  The proprietary nature of conscious
awareness is as immutable as the absolute nature of Essence.

[Arlo]:
> What is it that gives man this priviliged "awareness of self" and
"sensibility
> of value"? Why does man possess it, but not Platt's cat? Is it a function
of
> DNA? Or is it a function of "something else"? If so, what?

It's that special creation of Essence whereby the finite subject is granted
the privilege of realizing and affirming the value of its infinite Source.

> [Arlo]
> Like Platt, you suffer from a delusion of dichotomy.
> It was, in fact, "me" you included a statement recognizing
> the "unique proprietary experience" of the "individual".
> Unlike you, I see that there is much more to the "me" than
> my "unique proprietary experience", and that is the "shared
> symbolic experience of the collective consciousness",
> without which the software program in my head
> running the program "Arlo" would be non-existent
> (to use Pirsig's metaphor).

If you consider yourself programmed by a collective consciousness, then you
deny the freedom that is every individual's privilege in this world.  As I
said, you're in a self-imposed state of denial, insisting that reality is
nothing but objective behavior patterns and refusing to see it from the
inside.  You'll find no value in life until you change your perspective.

[Arlo]:
> [F]or me "consciousness" emerges through the biological
> individual's appropriation of the "collective consciousness".
> This appropriation gives her the agency to act,
> but also constrains her actions, it gives her a historical
> dialogue in which her activity is a part of, but it also
> structures her to act in particular ways.

Sorry, Arlo, but I can't buy into your epistemology.  Man is free to choose
his values and act upon them, bearing full responsibility for his actions.
Whatever other "structure" he feels constrained by is pathological and
self-limiting.  I sincerely hope you can see your way out of this
collectivist worldview and experience life as the free individual you were
born to be.

Best regards,
Ham