Richard noticed that actually we, humans, are barely self-aware. We don't know much about ourselves. We don't know about ourselves much at bitrh, right? Later we learn many things obout ourselves, but MOST facts about ourselves we learn NOT from our own sensors, but from textbooks (i.e., we learn what OTHERS discovered about humans). So, if not the information from OUTSIDE about our anatomy, chemistry, etc, we may not be even be "barely self aware", at least not much beyond animals.

The point I try to make is that by nature "self-awareness" of human brain is not far superior than "self-awareness" of primate brain.

Most things we know about ourselves is not "self" awareness, but "awareness of others about us".

• our survival may depend on pulling head out of your *** - spazcon - December 18, 2001 - 02:00 UTC
  • It was always this way. - alexander - December 18, 2001 - 02:21 UTC
    • BIG HELP from science, but not from you, right? - spazcon - December 19, 2001 - 07:04 UTC
      • What science does? Look around. Name ANYTHING science does not. - alexander - December 19, 2001 - 17:51 UTC
        • In reference your no-help answer, that's where - spazcon - December 19, 2001 - 22:02 UTC
          • Should ALL scientists quit their work and start concerning - alexander - December 19, 2001 - 22:46 UTC
            • Oh, well...I tried to be a good correspondant - spazcon - December 20, 2001 - 04:46 UTC
              • Not talking to me either - yanniru - December 20, 2001 - 23:53 UTC
• Self-awareness is not from textbooks - harvey1 - December 19, 2001 - 05:02 UTC
  • Define self-awareness then, please. - alexander - December 19, 2001 - 18:00 UTC
    • Let's be very detailed - harvey1 - December 20, 2001 - 06:30 UTC