02 Apr 2010 @ 4:49 PM 

Unconsciousness is a distinct state of consciousness. You might say that makes no sense, consciousness is a specific thing and unconsciousness is considered to be the opposite of it; consciousness require thoughts, awareness, an autonomous will and the means to act and perceive, and unconsciousness is the absence of all those things. But what are thoughts? What are sensations? How does inanimate molecules generate things like ideas and emotions? What is this process, this experience we’re all familiar with? These are for the most part unanswered questions, or questions with no accurate answers. So if it’s obvious to us that plants are unconscious, we would only be assuming that what we know to be consciousness definitely requires a brain, or at the least some type of a nervous system.

Basically a fundamental requirement for life is the ability to autonomously derive sustenance from its environment through various methods, which means that all life, to some degree, is possibly aware of its environment. Creatures that spend their entire life cycle in the oceans, for example, are oblivious to the fact that they are immersed in a particular mixture of H2O, and lacking the ability to make use of such astute analysis never the less are well equipped to navigate the complexities of their environment.  While the fundamental differences between a conscious human being and an unconscious tree is obvious in that plants, along with 99% of our planet’s living organisms, accomplish the same task without brain matter. Living things, even without a recognizable central nervous system, possess some means to autonomously derive sustenance from its environment. And to go one step further, if what life basically does serves to perpetuate it self, who’s to say that non-living things, mars, or the sun even, are not conscious entities. Not specifically the narrow definition of “consciousness” meaning simply the product of a mental process, but conscious as in a mechanism that is itself self perpetuating; or if you like, consciousness meaning an entity that is a product of, and derive sustenance from its environment through some means or mechanism.

And why stop there, the entire universe, we can safely say, possesses the ability to autonomously sustain itself in its “environment”, the nature of which we’re not entirely sure – that is to say there is a reality outside our perceivable universe that plays a role in sustaining our existence, as well as it own existence presumably; I mean who’s to say Dark Matter isn’t made of conscious substances. And, because we exists as a consequence of all that there is, arguably we can also say that there’s certainly a hire level of consciousness orchestrating it all; definitely something outside our own brand of consciousness giving the complexity and the apparent immensity of our universe as we’ve perceived it. And we shouldn’t diminish or belittle this brand of consciousness by calling it God, giving the history of that particular title, unless we’re ready to admit we live a parasitic existence in our inability to contribute anything significantly important to the universe that sustains us. One could argue human beings, the conscious intelligent creatures, in reality occupy the lower rungs of the evolution ladder outside our peculiar egocentric sphere of perception. Even in our little human centered universe we have to admit we are basically puny and insignificant compared to say the Sun. The Sun and its gravity sustains an entire solar system in a universally ubiquitous process, we can’t do anything that even remotely compare to that in scale or level of importance obviously; our “Will” can barely sustain us as a species in our human centric world.

So all this begs the question, what is consciousness, and how do we measure the potential of this phenomenon against the 13+ billion years of existence that created it. Lets say for argument sake we were to redefine the process that encompasses consciousness and unconsciousness, giving it a broader distinction of which both consciousness and unconsciousness are components of. Fittingly we can call this phenomenon “Reality” and strictly define it the following ways for example: Reality is – the momentum of accumulated sequences of actions and reactions, nothing more; or a more basic definition: Reality is – the various processes of existing, whatever they might be. We can say definitively then that reality, as far as we know, is conscious by nature – meaning “Reality”, with the exception of the existing brain matter (that of human beings and other creatures that evolved a complex brain), is entirely filled with other stuff that doesn’t require a thought process or any of the things that narrowly defines the human brand of consciousness to perpetuate itself, but can still be considered conscious. In other words the external “Reality” is made of conscious stuff. Nature is conscious; the fundamental building blocks of matter always combine to form conscious entities, objects and the forces that govern objects in our universe are components of a conscious mechanism. The universe, which we are apart of, is conscious. And of course there can be no definitive point  of view that might contradict such an argument seeing that we (human beings – the source of any interpretation) by default all exist within the narrow boundaries of our egocentric paradigm, oblivious to the true nature of the reality that mysteriously includes us in the process.

Posted By:
Last Edit: 02 Apr 2010 @ 11:50 PM

EmailPermalink
Tags
Tags:
Categories: On Mind


 

Responses to this post » (None)

 
Post a Comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


 Last 50 Posts
 Back
Change Theme...
  • Users » 9
  • Posts/Pages » 2
  • Comments » 0
Change Theme...
  • VoidVoid « Default
  • LifeLife
  • EarthEarth
  • WindWind
  • WaterWater
  • FireFire
  • LightLight

About



    No Child Pages.