Truly, What Is Consciousness?

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 3230
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Truly, What Is Consciousness?

Post by Fooloso4 » May 10th, 2017, 3:21 pm

Tamminen:
My point is that the ceasing of my world for good and with it the ceasing of logic and time for me is more serious to the world and our reality than most of us think.
Have you shown any of this to be the case?
Wittgenstein was only a starting point for my thoughts, and I appreciate your expertise on his vews and corrections to my interpretations.
One thing I was trying to clear up is where your thoughts diverge from his. It has been a long time since I looked at the Tractatus. It is a challenging, frustrating, and fun text. I appreciate the opportunity to revisit it.
… it seems that he thinks consciousness (if that is the right word in this case) is independent from the world.
I don’t think so. That my consciousness is not within the world does not mean it is independent of the world, it means it is not within the limits of the world. It is not a logical relationship. It is like the relationship between my world and ethics. My consciousness is of the world.
…. so that there would be times at which I exist and other times at which I do not exist. This leads to solipsism.
I do not see why my not having existed or no longer existing leads to solipsism. Are you using I in an ambiguous way? As both the experiencing subject and as a particular experiencing subject?
All experiences are my experiences …
Again, you seem to be playing on the ambiguity of the term. All experience is mine in the sense of the experiencer, but unless you are doubting the existence of other minds then it does not follow that I am the only experiencer. It does not follow that you are not also an experiencer.
However, there are others with their own experiences. This leads to transmigration.
What is transmigrating? The soul? The experience? If I am in pain and you are in pain are you claiming that pain transmigrates or that we are somehow one universal subject?

Tamminen
Posts: 693
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Truly, What Is Consciousness?

Post by Tamminen » May 10th, 2017, 5:19 pm

Fooloso4 wrote:Have you shown any of this to be the case?
No, it is kind of an insight, and the concept of transcendental subject transmigrating through all the points of view to the world we call individuals makes the situation normal again. Only this way the world does not vanish away when I die.
Fooloso4 wrote:I don’t think so. That my consciousness is not within the world does not mean it is independent of the world, it means it is not within the limits of the world. It is not a logical relationship. It is like the relationship between my world and ethics. My consciousness is of the world.
I have my point of view to the world, and you have your point of view to the world. So there seems to be two metaphysical subjects. But you said we cannot say so. In that case, is it not an abstraction? I think there must be a concrete relation between our points of view. If the relation is only that factual relation, a fact of the world, which we all know, then there must be several points of view. In fact I accept the concept of the metaphysical I, but we need to establish a concrete relation between those several points of view, and that is why I have introduced the concept of transcendental subject, which is the unifying principle between them, but it needs the transmigration part to complete the concrete picture, because I think Wittgenstein's view lacks concreteness and is very difficult to understand.
Fooloso4 wrote:I do not see why my not having existed or no longer existing leads to solipsism. Are you using I in an ambiguous way? As both the experiencing subject and as a particular experiencing subject?
If my existence does not depend on time, there must be only one subject, and I have called it the transcendental subject.
Fooloso4 wrote:Again, you seem to be playing on the ambiguity of the term. All experience is mine in the sense of the experiencer, but unless you are doubting the existence of other minds then it does not follow that I am the only experiencer. It does not follow that you are not also an experiencer.
See above.
Fooloso4 wrote:...we are somehow one universal subject?
This is the whole point. I think we must modify the old eastern thought of the transmigration of souls so that there is only one transcendental subject that adopts all the ways of being in the world we call individual subjects. How this is possible, and how it takes place concretely, we probably cannot know, but it is a hypothesis that answers many difficult existential questions, which many religions have failed to answer, for example, what does it mean to die.

Fooloso4
Moderator
Posts: 3230
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Truly, What Is Consciousness?

Post by Fooloso4 » May 10th, 2017, 8:46 pm

Tamminen:
Fooloso4 wrote:...we are somehow one universal subject?
This is the whole point.
Okay, got it. Thanks.

Post Reply