RJG wrote:Logically we can't 'know' what we think until AFTER we think it. We can't be conscious-of-X without the (pre-existing) X to be conscious of.
Consul wrote:Of course, the beginning of my awareness of my thinking cannot be earlier than the beginning of my thinking; but it is not the case that it must be later than the end of my thinking…
Well, technically all we can really say is that the thoughts (bodily reactions) themselves and the 'awareness' (recognition/consciousness) of those thoughts are 'out-of-sync'. Whether one finishes completely before the other starts is dependent on a couple variables; 1) the chronological length of the thought, and 2) one's mental processing speed of recognition (i.e. the time it takes to be aware of one's thought).
Consul wrote:...because it can be (at least partly) simultaneous with my thinking.
Not so. "Simultaneous" awareness would require "instantaneous" processing which is a logical impossibility. All processes consume time, including the processes of recognition/consciousness/awareness.
RJG wrote:Case 1. Consciousness of X is AFTER the X
Consul wrote:1 is false, because introspection is not the same as retrospection/recollection. I can very well be conscious/aware of current/present experiences.
Being conscious of Memory-X is the same as being conscious of Thought-X. The consciousness-of-X is always AFTER the X. Note: One cannot be conscious of 'something', if there is no pre-existing 'something' (i.e. bodily reaction; experience) to be conscious of.
RJG wrote:Case 2. Causation of X is BEFORE the X
Consul wrote:2 is false too if causation is understood as the manifestation of causal powers. I have the active power to think or imagine, and my exerting it is simultaneous with my thinking or imagining.
Firstly, 'cause' precedes 'effect'.
Secondly, "causal powers" are logically impossible. I suspect one's belief in "causal power" stems from one's indoctrination/upbringing. Logically, everything we experience has already been created/caused, and hence, too late to create/cause.
Conscious causation is an oxymoron. We can't consciously cause X BEFORE we are conscious-of-X. And we can't be conscious-of-X BEFORE the existence of X. -- We can't turn the generator until we power the motor. And we can't power the motor until we turn the generator.
Consul wrote:Of course, an experiential content cannot be without being experienced by a subject. But, again, that I experience mental words or images doesn't mean that I don't actively, intentionally, voluntarily think or imagine them. I experience my mental actions.
Firstly, if you experience your actions, this means your actions preceded your experiencing of said actions. And therefore causation would be impossible. (The experiencing-of-X can only be AFTER the X).
Secondly, your belief in "causal power" is not logically founded. You can't cause that which has already been caused. You can't logically be both the experiencer and the causer of the experience. It is impossible to consciously create an experience, for you to 'then' become conscious of. -- You can't plug an extension cord into itself to power itself.
RJG wrote:Mr533473, you again miss the point. It is NOT like saying "everything that is blue is blue". It is like saying "EVERYTHING is blue". ...meaning EVERYTHING is just an experience (sensation), ...meaning, in this life of ours, all we can really only experience are experiences (sensations). That's it.
Consul wrote:We experience not only sensations but also emotions and episodes of imagination or cogitation (thought).
Agreed. Emotions, Imaginations, Thoughts, Feelings, Urges, etc are all experiences (bodily reactions) that we experience.
Consul wrote:I agree with you that, strictly speaking, we always experience nothing but experiences; but this doesn't mean that we always perceive nothing but experiences…
Perceptions are experiences. And it is not logically possible to experience a non-experience.
Consul wrote:...and I can intentionally do something without feeling an urge or drive to do it.
So then what is it that you're feeling when you are being intentional? Is it an 'urge' (compulsion/desire/want) to do something? ...and if so, did you cause (intend) this intention?
RJG wrote:We don't/can't consciously move our bodies about, we are only just conscious of our bodies moving about.
We don't/can't consciously cause our bodily actions, we are only just conscious of our bodily reactions.
Consul wrote:So you deny the existence of agent causation?
Yes. Also there is no "agent" (no mind, nor autonomous controller of our bodily actions/reactions/experiences), there only exist a physical body that experiences and auto-reacts accordingly. Essentially we are just a blob of reactive material like everything else in this universe. But if this truth is too harsh or ugly to accept then we will auto-react by making up 'feel-good' (and logically impossible) fairy tales to believe instead.