Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!univ-lyon1.fr!swidir.switch.ch!news.unige.ch!usenet
From: sylvere@divsun.unige.ch (Silvere Martin-Michiellot)
Subject: Re: What makes up consciousness?
Message-ID: <1995Feb15.135900.20008@news.unige.ch>
Sender: usenet@news.unige.ch
Reply-To: sylvere@divsun.unige.ch
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland
References: <kovskyD3z34u.H5x@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 13:59:00 GMT
Lines: 57

In article H5x@netcom.com, kovsky@netcom.com (Bob Kovsky) writes:
>In article <departedD3ysx5.5rn@netcom.com>,
>just passing through <departed@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>....
>
>>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)
>
>	The experience is not easily described and any attempt sounds 
>rather gooey:  "be here now" etc.  There is consciousness, but there is 
>detachment from objects of consciousness.   I am aware and am aware that 
>I could attach my consciousness to objects, but it is much nicer not to.  
>Percepts are there floating around, I just don't attach to them.  
>Eventually, however, the detachment disappears and I do attach.  (I 
>usually attach to "plans," such as things to be done that day.)
>

Have You read the book on Sorcery by Carlos Castaneda (sorry I don't know the english
titles) ? 
One of the things he proposes is to stop thinking, and to look at things with only
short glances.
The idea is in fact near from you surely do (I think...).
I think he has found a way to explain that.
The idea is to leave all your personal feelings (like the "plans" of the day) and 
speech you always carry on. You finally become aware and peacefull but totally
unable to demonstrate theorems (or any other strong cognitive activity) while doing so.

Of course his books are not what we would call scientific. but who cares.

-----------------

"Is anyone alive down there ?" 

Silvere MARTIN-MICHIELLOT


