[MD] The Beginning of it All

[David M]

> DM
> Like human beings (4 levels + DQ), consciousness has many elements
> to it. Like human beings this includes elements that
> have been around since the big bang, i.e. DQ and then the first level.
> Evolution adds the extra levels and sublevels that have more limited
> histroies. Looked at like this I'd suggest a key element of consciousness
> that we might call DQ has always been around.
>
> [Krimel]
> You still have consciousness growing out of many elements; not as the 
> source
> of elements. For the Taoists in the house this makes consciousness one of
> the 10,000 things.

Krim

No, maybe I'd suggest more strongly 51% (arbitrary number) of consciousness
is 'down to' DQ which is not one of the 10,000 SQ things and has no obvious 
origin/beginning.
DQ not being something that comes and goes like SQ/things.


> [DM]
> Seems to me some suggestions that something like consciousness is required
> for the cosmos to exist is a slightly unclear attempt to see that there is
> more to evolution than SQ we need the DQ and
> chance-events-actions-felts-qualia-qualities may have more of a history in
> cosmic evolution than
> full blown human consciousness but may have these felt or active qualities
> involved.
>
> [Krimel]
> I am not sure what consciousness, much less what it is like. James says it
> is a process that arises from the interaction of physiology and the
> environment.

Been reading some Zizek (yes I have a habit) and he suggest quite 
interestingly
that it is a lack, a need, a void, and one that is somehow answered.
Pehaps this is what indeterminacy is.


> [DM]
> As Pirsig says does the leaping electron have
> some kind of motivational or timing aspect. Who knows, I know
> you prefer to say chance, but you cannot rule out some internal
> aspect to the jumping jelly beans!
>
> [Krimel]
> You can say that all the electrons in a cloud rush to earth in bolt of
> lightning because they love to party hardy with their sisters on the 
> ground.
> But this offers nothing to our understanding of electricity. Yes, I prefer
> to stick with chance until something better is offered.

DM: But this is what a whole bunch of particles do some times when they
just happen to constitute something like a human being. When something moves
saying whether it falls, is pulled, jumps, or decides, or wants to move, or
obeys a law, is often hard to decide what is more appropriate. Saying
that it is chance is just as arbitrary as saying it decides to jump. I think
electrons are drawn to colour (when I'm feeling like a hippie) or is
it vibrations? Newton thought along these lines too.

>
> [DM]
> In our experience consciousness falls into mechanism/habits rather than 
> vice
> versa. Does DQ preceed SQ? Does DQ jump, whilst SQ is an acquired
> unconsciousness.
>
> [Krimel]
> If by 'falls' you mean 'disappears into', yes. We practice so as to 
> acquire
> mechanisms/habits that overcome the need for the experience of
> consciousness. We drive and type and walk without conscious effort at 
> least
> in the sense of attentive focus.

DM: There you go, before unconscious law/SQ there is conscious DQ, maybe.
Does chance occurwhen DQ cannot make up its mind to form an 
unconscious/habit/law?
And where there is no law/habit is this lack forced into awareness of some 
kind? Maybe,
worth asking I'd suggest.


>
> DQ and SQ coexist. They are the complementary perceived aspects of 
> Quality.
> I suspect consciousness resides in the perception or visa versa. If by
> unconscious you mean "not conscious" I would applies that to pretty much
> everything. As far as we can tell everything that is not unconscious calls
> earth's orbit home.

DM: Yet I attribute consciousness to you via mere emails that simply change
and appear as mere things.

>
> If you mean mental activities that do not involve attentive awareness,
> things get pretty interesting. The bodily activities moderated by the 
> brain
> include quite a spectrum, from the heart beats to T-cells. And all of them
> can be affected by experience. Even the immune system responds to 
> classical
> conditioning techniques. This kind of conscious, even in elementary form,
> emerges from and is affected by interaction in the environment.

DM: It's interesting stuff.

>
> [DM]
> No way to clearly decide I'd suggest.
>
> [Krimel]
> Russell would call that a logical atom.

DM: He was just a bit of a bully wasn't he.

>
> I would flip a coin and call it tails. I don't think Russell would have a
> problem with that. Why do you?

DM: It dismisses heads without a fair hearing. I'm hear to fight for the
outsider that should at least still be in the race.