Sept 18 (To understand this blog you’ll want to begin at the beginning: HOME – Post 1, June 14, 2015). Short glossary: N = Now, D = Demiourgos (God) C = Consciousness Q = Incipient consciousness occurring at N W = World State
The manner in which C is given into the physical world is the body. Even C in newborn humans, controls the body, albeit to no apparent purpose given the confusion of perceptia it faces without the template of a categorical hierarchy. This hierarchy acts as an interpretive filter through which, socially composed reality successfully passes (given the absence of psychosis) and the chaos of the categorically unstructured is left out.
At N the brain is presented as a still, with apparent action frozen in place: the ball soaring toward the left field fence, the butterfly pausing in its jittery course to contemplate an indigo cluster of early fall asters – all frozen motionless in the instant of duration, given as a newly-created universe. It is a multi-dimensional pattern, curving in convolutions as space possibly is twisted back upon itself.
C, in its primitive form, Q, is not frozen but acts through the brief duration given at N. It is aware of logos and aware of itself, recognizing logos (which it could not do without a particle of memory). C, through the accumulation of Q remembering who it is, thus assuming identity, begins the task of sorting and in doing so, establishing conceptia through a categorical hierarchy. Just how the body supports Q is not known: the subject comprises occlusion 1). What exactly allows C to activate the body at will is also not precisely known, though some neurophysiologists apparently would like to propose that the brain on its own, impels action, which must also therefore, include intentionality.
This is downright silly. Neurons are stuff. Stuff doesn’t entertain intention. Moreover, stuff cannot cause. Only whatever it is, that presents time, and along with it, existence, causes, by means of determination of each state of being of the world at N. The brain can cause nothing – a fact I have established and stressed several times throughout this writing. Only C can cause its own body to act and to manipulate physicality around it and through technology at a distance. How C does this is the question of occlusion 2).
Occlusion 1) – The body is stuff. It cannot cause Q or cause an alteration in its action. Therefore, Q is GIVEN at N as an activity N–>N. But the body IS the locale of Q. As Q progresses to C and beyond, the brain is presented as immobile physical patterns which change from N to N. The activity of Q including memory must therefore correspond to a pattern in the brain presented at N that is NOT causal. It appears that the activity of each specific Q is represented in a specific geometric pattern presented in a state of the brain at N.
Question: The problem then arises, is Q not then DETERMINED and therefore C also determined at N by the creating agent, D?
Answer: Well, yes and no. Judgment of perceptia and conceptia in the understanding, must be freely made or it is not judgment – with the ethical consequence that no person can be held responsible for his or her actions. Therefore it must be implicatory that Q SELECTS the brain pattern of each new N, thus providing an answer to both occlusions 1 and 2.
Question: How can Q, which is CREATED by D go on to assume local powers of creation thus over-riding D’s (assumed) fiat?
Answer: Q is part of the NATURE of D, given out into W at N.
Essentially, the suggestion that Q selects the state of the brain or at least contributes to the NEXT brain state, isn’t all that outrageous a notion when one considers that the body generally is responsive to compulsion (except for autonomous systems like peristalsis or organ function like the livers, by the mind. One is tempted to speculate as to what other physical state conditions, small at the particle level or large at the galactic level, or even the presence of dark matter in asymmetric geometrics might support C as well as our own biologic physicalisms.
The question of determinism is closely involved with consideration of what makes up a ‘self,’ or ‘person’ Essentially, a self is simply (or very complexly) a consciousness. Machines are not conscious; they can perform indicate extrapolative functions beyond their initial programming’s – even to the point where they can behave as though they had specific emotions. But they are incapable of true emotions like fear, love or anxiety. They can formulate solutions to specific problems but they cannot be suddenly struck by a hitherto unexperienced revelation.
They may take the road to Damascus many times to do what they are supposed to do, but never once will be stricken by a voice from out of nothing and suffer the turmoil that St Paul undoubtedly suffered. They do not know the logos as their own: They know their parts and how they function but never the occasional oddity of being or why one’s being SHOULD be. They are cognizant of the passage of time as a measure of motion, but not of the immediacy of ‘now.’ They are responsive of the relationship of their sensory apparati to physicalia they sense but not of the difference between themselves as SELVES, separated from perceptia nor can they accept ‘now’ as an incipient when.
‘When,’ for a machine, is a switch in the circuitry. That is all. Machines are not conscious and never will be. At every N, a machine will be an inert lump of metal and plastic. But at W, consciousness will be an action of Q – an IMPROBABLE action – within an existence devoid of motion. In all of existence, only consciousness can be person. C is given as an action at an inert state of the brain at N. The brain cannot act, does not CAUSE Q. Q is given as a statement of the geometricity of the inert brain at N.
The geometricity is changed rapidly with the rapidly changing world states. The brain, is, of course, part of the world given at N. Its states would, since it is inert and cannot act through the void beyond N, the pattern of the state being a pattern of environmental physicality, must become for Q, a RELATION between the physical world and the logos which must tend to direct Q, which is a given action toward the physical world. This is also to its logos – memory, a memory of each world state which it inhabits.
thus the memory of Q builds over several created brain states as Q works toward C. Q is action at each N, with an accumulative memory of each relationship with each patterned brain state at N. The constructed memory is a recognition of W at each N as it also re-cognizes W’s given structural FORM: the LOGOS, the physical world is thus beheld as maintaining a CHANGING BUT CONTIGUOUS UNITY THROUGH ITS EXISTENCE IN TIME AND PLACE. If this interpretive relationship of the logos through Q to the given brain state at N, were to be interfered with, through damage to the brain, the resulting lacuna would proceed into loss of memory and perhaps even perception of the physical world.
The argument for free will is not airtight. It stems from the necessity of the consciousness, specifically in the activities of understanding to judge ideas, forms, trains of thought; to make judgments, not only to act but most importantly, to determine the truth or falsity of propositions or arguments. The understanding requires the liberty to roam, reflect, wander slightly unforcused in the field of many-coloured intellectual possibilities.
There are two kinds of determinism at issue here: is thought a produce of neural activity as it is structured in the brain? Further, if both brain states AND incipient cognitivity are both given by the agent of time and existence, then how is thought NOT thought of that agent. The first case is easier to deal with. The brain and the nervous system being physical stuff, are inert. Their only attribute as a state is extension. Nothing in their condition can be carried over through void, which obliterates everything.
One of the attributes of Q on the other hand, is trace memory probably prompted by the patterns of previous physical brain states. This makes C in its embryonic Q form THE ONLY manner in which world states relate to past states. It is the most likely reason that C conceives of being and the physical world as contiguous.
The second case, that of the possibility that what C believes to be its own thought, understanding, judgment, is actually that of the agent of being. With each C’s activity representing an isolated fragment of the agent of existence’s personality, we would be then presented with the troublesome possibility that only GOOD thoughts, intentions and acts are attributable to the creator. But erroneous, psychotic, depraved and downright EVIL ones as well.
In this investigation we are not blessed with the medieval principles of a creator, God who is possessed of essential attributes, one of which is that He (not, notice, ‘SHE’), represents perfection. Therefore He cannot be or perform any act that is less. So we are stuck with contemplating the POSSIBILITY of a creating agent who is not saddled with anything like the attributes of supreme goodness or perfection.
All this discussion of consciousness and brain-states, tend to sound as though the two were extended companions in place at N. Of course they are not. Consciousness is not physical, is not stuff and is not extended. Nor is it a by-product or epiphenomenon of an inert state. It is best expressed simply as a ‘happening,’ – not truly an activity, since action or motion is change of inert state at N and Q is not a state but rather something going on somewhere in the vicinity of a body. That is not CAUSED in any way by that body. What is less certain is the degree to which the consciousness is dependent on that body.
When a body dies, it undergoes a physical series of state-change in which organs cease to function and begin the process of disintegration. The brain stops changing at N in the manner of neural activity. Change reverses direction away from integrated function, toward passive breaking down of cellular cohesion both within each cell and in relation to neighbouring cells. The rain has ceased to be a brain.
What happens to consciousness? At the very least the understanding ceases to receive perceptia, a supplied by the body’s sensory apparatus. As for memory – we know personal identity in the physical world is lost under conditions of some types of brain damage or pathology. Certainly the consciousness must enter the strange world similar to some types of dreams where the consciousness loses the immediacy of all things physical.
The body has died. The marvelous machine pulses no longer with purpose. The blood settles with gravity to the lowest extremities, grows cold, begins to congeal into purple tar. The flesh loosens, cell by cell and begins to liquefy. Consciousness is orphaned, lost its home in the rapidly-changing geometrics of the brain.
Because we are physical, we only observe the physical. If the homeless consciousness remains conscious but without coordinates of right or left, up or down and with a weakening memory, what is left for the understanding to understand? The closest common analogy we have to draw from, is the state of dream. The dreaming consciousness remains tethered to a body but without perceptia. What it experiences is drawn from residual and distorted memory of a logos: being, time and place unregulated by category formation but closely enough resembling the social world to be convening to the consciousness of its reality.
And the point is, as North Americans natives once knew – it IS reality. Reality is perceptia and what the understanding makes of it as conceptia – or even simply conceptia alone, (as in the case of dream). We live through physical bodies and thus believe that the only mode existence takes is through stuff. But dream is existence and dream is NOT physical. Like physical reality, dreams are given at N but not as states – because they are NOT physical but as Q. Because the limitations placed upon consciousness by the social world, are very much weakened in dream, time may shift very rapidly or slow to almost a standstill, place becomes distorted with distances appearing at times almost meaningless.
We have no certain knowledge one way or the other, what happens to the consciousness after death of the body but dream, the ‘little brother,’ might offer a clue.
The question of C after death hangs to a certain extent on what, exactly, the relationship of C to brain activity is. The fact that the brain is inert at N and its only activity is change from one disconnected state to the next, replacing it from absolute nothing, renders a causal relation impossible UNLESS the specific PATTERN of every cell with other cells in the brain though inert, is somehow a causal condition for the happening of Q. Maybe Q’s happening is a kind of ‘remark’ on the brain state at N. This sounds weird, granted. But then, there’s nothing in our universe weirder than C.
If existence is a creation, then all states are determined at N. This means that all being – every work of art, every shot on goal, every lecture or seminar – is a puppet show, for and by the agent of being and time. Is reality an entertainment? The fact is, we cannot really discern a distinct relationship between the brain and consciousness. Trying to speculate on it isn’t likely to bring significant results. We know that certain types of activity in specific parts of the brain, occur when certain types of mental activities are reported.
But since a physical brain state cannot CAUSE a non-physical C activity, but rather since the brain is inert at N, proto-conscious activity at N must be given along with, (but distinct from), the inert state. The argument as to which appears first – the brain state or the conscious activity, is nullified at the level of N. But in order to C to develop into a unified perceptium or conceptium, both of which involve the understanding and category formation, a considerable passage of time must accrue. This process attests to cumulative memory development in successive Q DESPITE SEPARATION BY ABSOLUTE NOTHINGS.
Furthermore, the fact that C can apparently after future local body states – or at least it APPEARS to be the case – would seem to suggest that THERE IS A REAL INDEPENDENCE OF C FROM THE BRAIN even though the interference on brain activity through damage, drugs or pathology undoubtedly alters consciousness. It is more complex issue than simply cause and effect. Even so, there remains the question that if both Q AND brain states are given at N, how much freedom of conceptual judgment does C REALLY have?
Clearly as physical stuff, the brain is inert at N and can cause nothing, much less consciousness. But there are two alternate theories that could be looked at:
1) C, which CAN affect bodily states at N, actually CAUSE brain states.
2) Parallelism. Consciousness is given alongside and independent of brain states. There is no interrelationship.
If #1 were the case, then how would it be possible for a change in brain states to occur prior to a change in C? It would have to be shown that C would PRE-EXIST such a change in physical brain states – INDEED CAUSED said brain states through such physical events as, say, a stroke or an auto accident.
The alternative, #2, parallelism, escapes the dubious suggestion that C actually determines the course of future environmental (non-bodily), events in relation to the body. However, the perplexity surrounding parallelism is, why should there be events corresponding to and simultaneous with conscious events if they don’t play a causative role in their occurrence at all? It seems that the most reasonable conclusion to be made is that the body and brain do have some supportive function in respect to consciousness.
But since the body is physical, it cannot be causal. The mechanics of this, (if there are such), remain a mystery. I can accept some form of parallelism, largely because I have decided, in the course of this investigation, that the agent of N and |W is an intentional one. They are reasons, but they remain obscure.
It is pretty nearly terminally hard for us to grasp the nature of consciousness. it is not physical. It does not bear the property of extension – that stuff possesses. It bears no properties at all, other than that it is somewhere in the physicalia, close to a living body. it senses, emotes and ruminates. Bodies don’t feel pain. They send electrical impulses to and from the brain but only the consciousness hurts. By thus hurting, does the consciousness do something for the body, like telling it to withdraw its hand from the hot pot handle or does the body do something for the consciousness in telling it the handle is hot enough to hurt?
Or does the body tell the consciousness that handle hurts in order to get the consciousness to give the order to the body to move its (the body’s), hand? Bodies do not plan strategies, unlike consciousness, which is composed of activity such as awareness at N. Bodies are composed of immobile states that happen ‘now,’ when time happens. The common and most serious misconception about nature is that there is such a thing as cause and effect as a result of properties in stuff and combinations of stuff.
But all of these seeming properties are a result of motion given as changes of the states of the universe given at N: not to stuff, but absolute pervading change of the entire cosmos from moment to moment. The only motion given to the entire universe is that it appears at an instant of time and then immediately disappears. It goes nowhere. It simply no longer is. It was, for the briefest moment possible but now it is not, leaving not the slightest trace of it ever having once been – in one flash of magnificent glory. But then – not a trace…
EXCEPT… as a tiny, tiny, moment of memory in the briefest moment, consciousness endures. Unlike anything else in the entire cosmos, this little moment of memory will be retained in a grain of consciousness that will appear at the next instant instantaneous stroke of time when an entirely new universe will be given for a new instant and the particle of consciousness contained in this new creation will have the memory of the last as well as the new one. Both will go on to the next moment of creation until consciousness and a social world is built.
In this way, consciousness survives annihilation and the void. This retention of memory is, like all else, GIVEN at N. It is the ONLY thing in the universe that does this.
MORE TO FOLLOW OF THIS INVESTIGATION OF EXISTENCE