Hi
This is a Darwinist plea to God for more Intelligent Design, in the spirit of Ingersoll's
"An honest God's the noblest work of Man."

Does consciousness survive our death, some ask? We might ask if birth is any hazard to it! Most human mental activity is less than a glorious example of being CONSCIOUS.

Information flows through our society
with modification; it "evolves." But
so have alligators -- for millions of years.
Are you calling them conscious?

It is not enough that information gradually
changes and grows by contact with human beings, for the same occurs as a result of earthquakes and weather and grass growing and being eaten.

To consider CONSCIOUSNESS a new class of information processing, we should have UNIQUE phenomena, not just more and greater phenomena of a prior kind. ( We do not say, "A more beautiful flower is a new category of the universe compared to a plainer flower." )
Is city-building an evidence of consciousness,
or just an extension and elaboration of the activity of ants? Are ants conscious?

Should we assume most human beings are CONSCIOUS, or should we instead devise some rule for distinguishing CONSCIOUSNESS from elaborate sociobiological process, or even, as with some posters here, ANTICONSCIOUSNESS ?

Warm regards and Happy New Year (if you're on that calendar)
Mike

• What constitutes "conciousness"? - thewitt - December 29, 2003 - 02:52 UTC
  • Hi William; Since you have read it, please elaborate - quiet - December 29, 2003 - 04:14 UTC
    • Logic - thewitt - December 30, 2003 - 02:30 UTC
    • Conciouness on earth - thewitt - December 30, 2003 - 02:32 UTC
      • Hi Will...it's just that this forum is one place to consider it - quiet - December 30, 2003 - 07:57 UTC
    • Follow up on Kant - thewitt - December 30, 2003 - 03:00 UTC
      • "Bicentenniel Man" by I.Asimov defines humanity as the - quiet - December 30, 2003 - 08:01 UTC
        • Yes - secretary - December 30, 2003 - 13:32 UTC
        • However, I think that definition was premature - quiet - December 30, 2003 - 19:17 UTC
  • Kant - tkorrovi - December 29, 2003 - 13:59 UTC
    • I do agree with Kant - secretary - December 29, 2003 - 16:23 UTC
      • How can we discover something what we cannot imagine? - tkorrovi - December 29, 2003 - 16:37 UTC
        • Can you imagine what an electron looks like - secretary - December 29, 2003 - 16:57 UTC
          • We can imagine what we know or suppose about electron (nt) - tkorrovi - December 29, 2003 - 17:12 UTC
            • But that is not necessary to discover one - secretary - December 29, 2003 - 18:40 UTC
              • Feedback that is merciful, just and humorous - quiet - December 29, 2003 - 19:18 UTC
              • Electron was not discovered a posteriori - tkorrovi - December 29, 2003 - 19:26 UTC
                • Hi Tarvo -- care to discuss the topic of this thread? - quiet - December 29, 2003 - 20:09 UTC
                  • Yes, you talk to him - secretary - December 29, 2003 - 21:08 UTC
                    • This was offensive (nt) - tkorrovi - December 29, 2003 - 21:39 UTC
                      • I'm not interested in such obviously meaningless messages. - secretary - December 29, 2003 - 22:03 UTC
                  • I would like to talk to you, Mike - tkorrovi - December 30, 2003 - 14:45 UTC
                    • Just hide me - secretary - December 30, 2003 - 15:49 UTC
                    • Yes, Tarvo. We can talk - carefuluniverse - January 10, 2004 - 03:51 UTC