The Mind-Finger Problem.

I think consciousness is more tied into imagination and creativity than anything else.
If you really think about it, the more imaginative and creative you are, the more likely you are to understand the correlations between consciousness and the soul.

Seeing how religion is an equal step in the same direction, I may not be too far off.

Originally posted by trysts

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne


But the finger is unable to interact and help form percepts any longer. The space where that finger was is no longer a utility of the conscious. It cannot build with it anymore. It cannot make it do anything.

I very much enjoyed reading Merleau-Ponty, when I went to University, and you sound like you're questioning the Cartesian cogito in the spirit of Merleau-Ponty. But, I think that consciousness can not be cut-up like a body can. So, less or more consciousness doesn't seem reasonable to me. I am quite sure that consciousness doesn't require certain parts of the body, in order to be. So, for me, the mind-body problem, and the language used to demonstrate it, remains problematic in the history of philosophy

I am tackling the mind body problem! I will try to find some Merleau-Pointy the next time I grace the book store.

So far, I haven't found any reason to believe the consciousness extends outside the skin. Also I don't believe that consciousness is one thing, but many things, as I'm trying to show logically with the idea of losing a finger.

Thanks for sharing your insight.

reply to post by BoyMeetsWorldATS


I dont suffer from phantom limb syndrom but I do get pains in two front teeth that are no longer there. I had two teeth removed from the bottom front of my mouth and occasionally I feel pain where those teeth used to be. The same pain I experienced when the teeth were there.

This goes to cellular memory. Memory not in your mind but in your body. I remember reading about a young man who got a kidney transplant craving reeses peanut butter cups after the surgery. The young lady who donated the kidney was a hugh fan of reeses peanut butter cups according to her family. So did the kidney remember the peanut butter cups or what ?

Originally posted by Moneyisgodlifeisrented
I think consciousness is more tied into imagination and creativity than anything else.
If you really think about it, the more imaginative and creative you are, the more likely you are to understand the correlations between consciousness and the soul.

Seeing how religion is an equal step in the same direction, I may not be too far off.

edit on 7-7-2012 by Moneyisgodlifeisrented because: (no reason given)

I would agree that imagination is a great force in consciousness.

But I still hold that interaction and the building of percepts is just as important to the imagination as the imagination is to the consciousness. Without the ability to experience existence, the imagination would have anything to think of and build upon.

reply to post by BoyMeetsWorldATS


Here I am hoping that heaven or what ever comes next is more than just a light orgy. I want an existance that is meaningful to the consciousness I have now, the "me" I am now.

Originally posted by karen61057
reply to post by BoyMeetsWorldATS

 

I dont suffer from phantom limb syndrom but I do get pains in two front teeth that are no longer there. I had two teeth removed from the bottom front of my mouth and occasionally I feel pain where those teeth used to be. The same pain I experienced when the teeth were there.

This goes to cellular memory. Memory not in your mind but in your body. I remember reading about a young man who got a kidney transplant craving reeses peanut butter cups after the surgery. The young lady who donated the kidney was a hugh fan of reeses peanut butter cups according to her family. So did the kidney remember the peanut butter cups or what ?

Very interesting, thank you for sharing. I will look into cellular memory.

reply to post by TheSubversiveOne


If its not measured then how can it be less or more than what it was before or what it is now ?

reply to post by karen61057


Aah. Finally, someone who loves life.

reply to post by Cocraine


Technically you loose the tactile sensations from that finger. You loose the sense of touch which does make you less aware as one of the five senses that are designed to help you stay alive and safe has now been deminished. However I've heard it said that when you loose one sense your others will take up the slack to insure your continued survival without the lost sense. I dont know if that is true or not.

reply to post by TheSubversiveOne


I'm just going with what I know LOL.
I love being able to love both emotionally and physically and that includes just petting my kitty.
I love "knowing stuff" and "learning stuff" and a light being just doesnt sound all that interesting to me.
What kind of fun can you have with a flashlight. (other than running it up the wall for said kitty to chase)

reply to post by Moneyisgodlifeisrented


I saw this show on the science channel where they did an expirment on a person with normal limbs. I dont remember the details of it but the person was seated in a booth and their arm and an artifical arm are on the table in front of them. The person is shield from seeing their actual limb but they can see the artifical one. They start out by caressing the real arm while doing the same thing to the artifical limb. They stroke up and down the arms but the person can only see them doing this to the artifical limb even though their real arm is being caressed and stroked in the same manner. The subject watches the action going on on the artifical limb while there own arm which is being caressed is hidden from their view. The experiment ends when the person caressing the arms then slams a hammer down on the artifical limb causing the subject to yell, wince in pain and withdraw their arm from the hammer blows even though their own limb was not touched by the hammer.
I think it was part of the Through The Worm Hole with Morgan Freeman series. Very interesting though I dont know what is says about consciousness other than it can be fooled.

reply to post by BoyMeetsWorldATS


You cant tell us where it is but you can tell us where it isnt and you can do that with strong conviction. Strange.
How is that ?

reply to post by TheSubversiveOne


Kirlian photography shows energy extending beyond the physical boundries of the body. I wonder ....


www.bing.com...

reply to post by PhoenixDown


Well if the idea is that physical trauma lessens consciousness what does death do to it? If loosing a limb can make you less conscious than what does death do . That kind of takes the whole shebang out of the life after death thing. No heaven, no virgins for the muslims, no nirvana, no tree of life, no nothing.

reply to post by TheSubversiveOne

how about looking at it from another angle, say you become blind. For sure consciousness is lost when sight is lost, but that available energy can flood in to other areas of your life. So its more a question of transference, of consciousness. So my answer to your very direct question is it makes no difference to the overall consciousness's, only to the relative consciousness . Its like sex,there is consciousness for a period and then it vanishes.Consciousness is kind of like a mirror that reflects what is in it. If there are 9 fingers that is what is reflected.

Would you then say that the more surfance area an animal has the more soul it has?

Your agrument seems flawed...

Originally posted by ancientthunder
reply to post by TheSubversiveOne

 

how about looking at it from another angle, say you become blind. For sure consciousness is lost when sight is lost, but that available energy can flood in to other areas of your life. So its more a question of transference, of consciousness. So my answer to your very direct question is it makes no difference to the overall consciousness's, only to the relative consciousness . Its like sex,there is consciousness for a period and then it vanishes.Consciousness is kind of like a mirror that reflects what is in it. If there are 9 fingers that is what is reflected.

I would tend to agree. The other senses do compensate. But either way, he is no longer able to form percepts with those eyes. He is no longer able to interact with those eyes. He can't see anything, which is a huge part of consciousness, if you would agree. Although he may be able to picture something in his mind, he is no longer able to add to the imagery with new visual percepts.

I like your mirror analogy, and I agree. I'm not saying it matters how much consciousness someone has, because they will definitely make do out of necessity. What I'm really getting at is that the mind and body are not separate. If we remove the eyes, the boundary of consciousness can be said to recede. If we remove anything vital, it is safe to say that consciousness ends.

Originally posted by Wertdagf
Would you then say that the more surfance area an animal has the more soul it has?

Your agrument seems flawed...

No I wouldn't say that at all.

If you lost your finger, would that area where your finger once was still provide towards the overall consciousness of the body? In other words, where your finger once existed, could you still exist? I would say no. Which implies that if we lost the rest of our body, ie. our legs, torso, arms etc. we will be that much less conscious. Proving, at least to me, that the soul, the spirit, and the mind are indeed one thing—the body.

I hope this is more clear.

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne

I am tackling the mind body problem! I will try to find some Merleau-Pointy the next time I grace the book store.

So far, I haven't found any reason to believe the consciousness extends outside the skin. Also I don't believe that consciousness is one thing, but many things, as I'm trying to show logically with the idea of losing a finger.

Thanks for sharing your insight.

If you read Merleau-Ponty, you will be getting into phenomenology, and that is a very interesting discipline. Heidegger's Being and Time picks up on phenomenology and is great reading, but it demands some serious study to understand.

Long story short - the world "shows up" only insofar as we have language with which to make sense of it, so language is synonymous with the "world" (because without language the world does not "present itself"). Language is a broad term that refers to more than written and verbal interactions; it includes things like the idea that roads and street signs are part of a "language" that allows cars and gas stations to "make sense." In this sense having language is the same as having consciousness, but language exists both inside and outside of any individual human. Thus language/consciousness comprises the whole world (for humans) and is beyond quantification and/or limitation.

I hope this gives you a satisfactory logical framework to think of consciousness as something that extends beyond the skin. If not you can try reading Wittgenstein and/or Richard Rorty if you prefer a hardcore analytic approach.

reply to post by wagnificent


I totally agree with this wholeheartedly.

I have read Being and Time quite some time ago. Also, I just bought Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations believe it or not, and I will soon jump into his work. I haven't quite started it as I have about 8 other books open; but after what you wrote, I may have to open it sooner. I heard Philosophical Investigations is contradictory to his first book, so I'm questioning if It's a bad idea to start with this one first. The problem is: there's not much Wittgenstein in the used-bookstore.