Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Yes, We Are In The Thicket

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on July 5, 2001 22:53:17 UTC

Hi Dick,

You are right about us getting to the nitty gritty. As for my 4th, it was good. I don't 'do fireworks' every year since I seem to remember the previous year like it was just here. In addition, I live in the Chicago area so we get fireworks all the time (every week downtown).

To show that I'm trying to get somewhere with my T/F questions (and not just have fun asking questions) I'll add some comments. Let me try to avoid some of your concerns by rephrasing some of my questions:

(T or F):

1. "I (CS) think *that* I (CS) am correct" says nothing new (i.e., the CS always thinks it is correct that is why this statement presents nothing new).

2. "I (CS) think *that* I (CS) am incorrect" is SC even though the difference between #1 is the word 'incorrect' versus 'correct'.

* I'm trying to understand why #1 is true and #2 is false even though they differ very slightly (correct versus incorrect).

3. "I (CS) think *that* I (CS) am Spiderman [or the Flash]" is an SC statement.

* The curious issue is why you judge #1 a CS statement and #2 and #3 as SC statements. To be in a "correct state" or possessing a "correct understanding about something" seems no more of a judgement than being incorrect about something or being some fictional character such as Spiderman or the Flash.

4. The statement: "I (CS) think *that* I (CS) am Spiderman" adds no new information to me, even though it may add new information about me to someone else.

* I'm curious why you feel such a statement can be tautological.

5. All complex relations are SC statements, and therefore CS statements and thoughts require the SC.

* I'm thinking that since language, shortterm memory, longterm memory is SC, then we can't say that CS works at all independent of the SC, at least in terms of communicating statements and thinking thoughts (i.e., complex relations to say the least). Such statements and thoughts would need to be somehow filtered and communicated through the SC, is that correct?

6. Since "tautological statements are simple enough that the CS can comprehend them the moment they are presented" is true, then there must exist some line of demarcation between CS and SC. The CS can't determine when this line has been crossed into the SC.

* My thinking here is that if a line of demarcation exists between CS and SC, then it is not clear which thoughts are mainly CS and which thoughts are SC.

It's gonna take a little more time to understand your usage of these terms, but I think I'm understanding much better how you classify these terms. My opinion is the terms 'conscious' and 'subconscious' are not good terms for your very restricted usage of those terms. Selecting the terms 'SC' and 'CS' is much more helpful.

Warm regards, Harv

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins