Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!departed
From: departed@netcom.com (just passing through)
Subject: Re: What makes up consciousness?
Message-ID: <departedD3ysx5.5rn@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <departedD3vKy5.M3B@netcom.com> <kovskyD3x7Gw.7JJ@netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 00:48:40 GMT
Lines: 53
Sender: departed@netcom7.netcom.com

In article <kovskyD3x7Gw.7JJ@netcom.com>, Bob Kovsky <kovsky@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <departedD3vKy5.M3B@netcom.com>,
>just passing through <departed@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>>Some proposed ideas/questions:
>
>...
>
>>4) Have you ever been conscious without being conscious-of something?
>>   Is it a necessary property of consciousness to be aware of something,
>>   or is it actually meaningful to speak of consciousness by itself?
>
>	Yes, I have been conscious without being conscious-of something. 
>It happens during meditation.  I try once or twice a day and make it about
>50% of the time.  It is sweet.  [A metaphor:  "consciousness connects self
>to experience.  Like a leash connects master to dog.  Sometimes, the leash
>slips off the dog.  Then it (the leash) just hangs there..."] My form of
>meditation is not buddhist, but some of the clearest verbalizations come
>from buddhists.  In Burmese buddhism, the condition of consciousness
>without an object is called "bare awareness."  See Nyanaponika Thera <The
>Heart of Buddhist Meditation>. 
>
>-- 
>
>*   *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *   * 
>    Bob Kovsky          |  A Natural Science of Freedom 
>    kovsky@netcom.com   |  Materials available by anonymous ftp
>                        |  At ftp.netcom.com/pub/fr/freedom
>*   *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *   * 
Okay ... I believe you ... in fact, I like Buddhist consciousness models
better than anything the West has come up with ... but some questions too:

What do you 'know' in that state?  Or do you realize _later_ that you were
in that state, without knowing it at the time?

How is the structure (or lack of structure) of that kind of consciousness
different from consciousness with an object?  Is it non-particular, i.e.
your consciousness just includes everything?

And, can you be sure that this consciousness does not have an object, or
simply that you do not perceive your own consciousness as having an object
during that time?  Perhaps, in looking back at it, you might see an object
of awareness, although that wasn't known at the time.

Are we talking about a shift in identification, so that all your perceptions
are not considered as 'other' but instead just as part of your consciouness?

In this state of non-object conciousness, perceptions still exist, correct?
But perhaps without giving rise to a feeling of 'other' ...

-- Richard Wesson (departed@netcom.com)


