[MD] Metaphysics and the mystic.

[118]

Hi Joe,

Personally I find it difficult to separate evolution from science,
since I was taught on the scientific presentation of evolution.  I
have no problem presenting an evolutionary description of reality, for
that is what "evolutionary theory" is.  Certainly there are many
scientific suggestions as to what consciousness is, and they keep
growing.  I am not so interested in describing consciousness, as
exploring the personal aspect of it.  It is easy to describe
consciousness in third person plural by explaining what consciousness
is as an object.  This may, or may not lead to a personal
enlightenment, if one personalizes it.

To ask "why is this consciousness mine?" is another question.  Here we
must consider what it is that makes us, us, in a personal sense.  This
then gets away from the materialistic aspects of consciousness to more
of a Cartesian duality.  As Marsha has said, she cannot find the
"self" through any logical deconstructionism.  Yet, we know that it
exists because it makes one distinct from the other meat puppets out
there, who are lost in their own worlds.  Our personal world is only
ours, nobody else can experience it, why is that?  No matter how hard
we try we can never explain to another that it is actually "I" that is
speaking to them, not just another meat puppet.

On 2/1/12, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:
> Hi Mark and All,
>
> If you look at the etymology of the word "consciousness" you see two roots
> "Con" "scious"  "With" "awareness" or "knowledge".  Two principles are
> involved, evolution and science.  To make sense of that you have to posit an
> evolutionary description of reality "conscious" and "mechanical" or
> "mathematical" differences.  And the hunt is on!

There is only a hunt if you define the parameters in order to create a
hunt.  If indeed we want to frame the debate in terms of mathematical
differences then we could hunt for such things.  I am game.
>
> Indefinable DQ definable SQ as a metaphysical base enables the recognition
> of the meaning of "consciousness".  Alright so you propose "evolution" as
> deciding the levels in existence, consciousness.  Mathematical order is
> inadequate since something is created from 0.  The definition of 1 has been
> changed in speech or consciousness.  I do not know how to make sense out of
> "consciousness" except through evolution which as yet does not have a
> metaphysical foundation! E(x) out of, voluntas, will.  Creation!

Evolution does not decide the levels in existence.  It is not a God of
some sort, as I interpret it.  Evolution is a description of a
process.  It is not the process itself, but one way in which to speak
of it.  Mathematics is not created from 0.  It assumes a concept of 0
in order to grow as a presentation.  One is one, I am not sure of the
change.  Perhaps you are referring to unity or non-duality.  Of course
non-duality is not 1, because 1 can only exist as opposed to zero or
two or whatever number you want.  The number one cannot exist on its
own, it is meaningless.

Evolution has a metaphysical foundation, it is called the Theory of
Evolution.  Is there another word you could use instead of "evolution"
so that I can see what you mean?

If I try to extend the Theory of Evolution to consciousness it could
be as follows (off the top of my head):

  "There is a selection process which considered focussed attention to
be necessary for survival.  Those individuals who were not able to
focus on a single intention did not survive, because they were too
scatter-brained (not referencing any one in the forum, by the way) to
go out and find food, or a partner.  Therefore consciouness began as a
survival adaptation.  It gave the individual a means with which to
continue to survive, through directed simplification of the
synchronicity of life.  Due to the enormous redundancy of the brain
(there are as many connections within the human brain as there are
stars), the brain was able to look back on itself (in a tortuous
manner which disguised that this is actually what we doing, i.e.
recycling water and pretending it is different water) and consider
one's own existence with relation to others.  This reflective
capability provided for such human traits as greed, pillage, and rape,
which is also a survival improvement as the chipmunks in the winter,
and the young stallion with his stolen harem will attest to.  In
addition, the ability of the human brain to create a conscious
projection of the future gave us the sense of terminality of our own
existence, and the need to survive all the more, this was very good
for evolution and in fact promoted the survival of the theory of
survival itself, in that those who feared death the most are all that
is left.  Death became the primary reason for survival whether it was
a losing battle or not, we are not reasonable enough to realize such
futility of reason, and besides, we are only instinct as evolution
will attest to, so evolution does not like reason.  Of course the
conception of a single existence and a void afterward was introduced
as an evolutionary incentive to try to stay alive as long as possible,
and thus evolution was able to increase is stranglehold on humanity.
Such projection capability which is inspired through a doggedly
complex memory, lead to questioning "what lies outside" of what we
know first hand (we want to know what is around that dark corner), and
into the regions of religion.  Religion was important for survival
because it created groups which would feel it necessary to survive
despite the antagonism against them, through the establishment of a
higher cause to which they must pray and obey.  The big boss of
consciousness was thus created for evolutionary purposes.  Once it had
had enough of that, evolution turned more to greed and avarice for its
followers.  This projection of meaning beyond oneself, provide a
species who was able to survive as a result of the ability to create
concepts which had no bearing on day to day reality.  The conscious
creations thus established, achieved a state of dominance over the
actual reality of the individual and promoted him/her to greater and
more complex groups which of course enhanced survival against being
eaten by a foreign invaders. And so, consciousness provided another
tool for evolution to bend our will.  Just to be secure of complete
domination, Evolution also caused individuals within a group to kill
the weakest ones available, those being the ones that did not believe
in evolution.  These individuals are of course dying off, for that is
the power of evolution.  So, it is clearly understood why the brains
material capacity to produce consciousness is a survival trait, and
that is its only purpose,everything else is trivial.  Those who think
otherwise will die off as an inferior species since they do not have
the guts to fight an destroy the evolutionists.  It is the belief in
evolution which comandeers the heartiest and the most willing to kill
(in the name of evolution).  Those meak non-evolutionists do not stand
a chance against the power of the Google Enterprise to subdue with
mediocraty in thought.  The other way in which we know that
consciousness promotes survival is that this is the only way to
explain why consciousness has surived.  If it had not survived it
would not have been an evolutionary bonus.  This is of course what has
happened to all those things that were not evolutionary improvements,
because they are not here.   It does not matter what they were, since
their not being here is proof enough.  That is one reason why
elephants do not live in NYC for example, even if we do read about
such possibilities in books; the bagels just do not add up.  We cannot
question evolutionary theory because it is self sufficient and does
not need any other proof except survival and the fact that elephant
bulls fight against each other to have a larger harem, and often
broken tusks.  Any notion that evolution is not the law of the land
will be taken care of through evolutionary means.  This is why the
three headed monkey God who whistles Dixie while taking a bath is no
longer around.  We simply have to be patient and "KILL! KILL! KILL!"
(did you say KILL?")  This is the evolutionary directive, only the
fittest survive, so you better survive to show that you are the
fittest.  If you can demonstrate this then you can survive to be the
fittest another day."

And so forth.  The Theory of Evolution can explain consciousness as
well as any metaphysics.  It can explain why MoQ came about, quite
simply.  In fact, if it wasn't for Evolution, MoQ would not be here,
so we should be grateful, pray, and provide sacrifices to Evolution.
There are statues all over this country where we can leave donation
for the Power of All.  Just don't forget, NEVER question Evolution,
bad things happen.
>
> It seems to me it would be a lot easier if the levels in evolution after 1
> were definable in DQ/SQ terms since evolve "ex" "voluntas" out of will,
> suggests a mathematical order and creation.  Metaphysics involves 'Will' and
> 'order' in a dance beyond definable mathematics!  1 is rigid without
> evolution which redefines 1 in consciousness.

They are defined in DQ/sq terms as far as I can tell.  This is the
dance which takes place outside of the mathematics lounge within which
those lizards are arguing about the meaning of the word "is".  We know
better, don't we?

Cheers,
Mark
>
>
>
> On 1/31/12 8:22 PM, "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe
>> you can contribute to what you think consciousness is.
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>