consciousness, the biggest problem that doesnt exist

[Anonymous No.12054135]

all this fuss about consciousness is ridiculous. some people say its one of the greatest problem in the world.
well, let me tell you why its not.
we often associate consciousness with the present moment, since it seems that, for us human, it is all we know. the present moment is nothing else but the "act of living" and it is experience by everything that lives.
obviously, every creatures experience life in its own way with its own senses and capacities, but it doesnt mean that the act of living of the human is anymore real than the act of living of a cow.
so now you might ask about the fuss of what is so different about human beings.
rationality, is a tool derived from a complex brain which has been very useful to humans. it makes him map things out in the real world and understand systems like: if i press this button, the light will open. the human can understand a whole lot using rationality, but he will always be limited to a superficial layer of reality, which is also only available by his limited senses.
understanding the weakness of rationality, the human should give it less importance and focus on what is really important : the truth of living, which is determined as doing what the man absolutely must do in the realest of way.
thank you

[Anonymous No.12054151]

>consciousness is only rationality
Lol

[Anonymous No.12054160]

what the man absolutely must do at every moment there is*

[Anonymous No.12054164]

>>12054151
>didnt understand at all

[Anonymous No.12054440]

>>12054135
Buddha, Julian Jaynes, and Bucke all have interesting stuff to say on the subject anon.

[Anonymous No.12054497]

Everything is conscious

[Anonymous No.12054540]

>>12054497
>t. Yogacarin

[Anonymous No.12054933]

>>12054440
please elaborate. my thread might look like a shit post but it isnt

[Anonymous No.12054941]

>>12054933
you can find their works easily online. Bucke's Cosmic Consciousness is fantastic

[Anonymous No.12054988]

>>12054135
What about NPCs? They have consciousness but no inner monologue, if there's no rationalization then do they not exist?

[Anonymous No.12055011]

>>12054497
Do you define a difference consciousness and self-consciousness?

[Anonymous No.12055014]

>>12054988
they exist but they are merely "humans" or "angels"

[Anonymous No.12055017]

>>12055011
Difference between*

[Anonymous No.12055027]

>>12054135

If man is limited to the superficial layer of reality it implies multiple layers. However it would be impossible for him to know of any other "layer" than the "superficial one", according to you. So effectively there only is only this superficial layer governed by senses and reason and consciousness. Care to explain the contradiction in your logic.

And where exactly is the line of consciousness drawn? All animals have consciousness? Do plants? Do inanimate objects?

[Anonymous No.12055037]

>>12054135
there's nothing about consciousness in your post. what are you even taking about?

[Anonymous No.12055044]

>>12055014
Sometimes I wonder if life would be easier as an NPC

[Anonymous No.12055079]

>>12055027
i dont see any contradictions to the logic, just inability to solve the whole riddle since we are limited beings. unless you think human have god potential, which i think is a good thing, and that we must live in a way we think we might be(what the man must do in at every moment there is) quoting my self here.
as for your second part
>and what exactly is the line of cosnciousness drawn?
"the act of living" is a phenomena that grows more and more to our perception of the "act of living" as humans, from grass to human beings.
there is NEVER a clear line to anything. one must realize that complexity grows gradually.

[Anonymous No.12055084]

>>12054135
so you believe consciousness is "associated with the present moment," and the present moment is nothing else but the "act of living." What separates humans from animals is "rationality," and using that rationality he will always be limited to a "superficial layer of reality." So humans ought to really focus on the "truth of living, which is determined as doing what the man absolutely must do in the realest way."

>consciousness is "associated with the present moment,"
find a clear definition of consciousness used by your opponents, and legitimately argue against those points, start here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consciousness/

>present moment is nothing else but the act of living
Too vague: impossible to tell if this is rampant Idealism, reductionism, are you saying life is an act? also maybe absolutism in something grounded in nothing?

>What separates humans from animals is rationality
Animals are often very rational. Most mammals will understand your button problem. Study anthropology and general biology for a much better answer than this.

>using that rationality he will always be limited to a "superficial layer of reality." which is also only available by his limited senses. understanding the weakness of rationality, the human should give it less importance and focus on what is really important : the truth of living, which is determined as doing what the man absolutely must do in the realest of way.
This is cool and all, but how you got here is extremely flawed. You're stepping on a full house of disciplines giving vague answers, and your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises.

[Anonymous No.12055147]

>>12055084
i wish i wasnt obliged to use a phone
1st point: i have no time in reading all this
2nd:how is this vague? do you have a better way of saying what the present moment is? we are all living and that living is all happening in the present moment for every living thing, which is the now. its grounded in the very thing we all experience right now. its so true and simple: its obvious
3rd point: obviously animals are also capable of rationality as i expressed it since, like i said to the other guy, they is NEVER a clear line to everything
4th: my last point is, i admit, a very abstract one, but it is very difficult to be very concrete when talking about this. i see it as the ultimate answer and it should be debated obviously: the truth of living is determined as doing what the man absolitely must do at every moment there is.

[Anonymous No.12055155]

>>12055079
>Humans have limited perception and can only understand and percieve "surface layer" of reality
>Yet even though they can only percieve rhe surface "layer" they somehow know of more "layers"

How?

[Anonymous No.12055226]

>>12054135
whoah, everyone, we got an einstein over here. thank you for rehashing what every thinker has already concluded from the beginning of time. your introduction of senses/perception/whatever the fuck doesn't change anything or warrant a new 'theory'.

[Anonymous No.12055232]

>>12054135
did someone just read sam harris lmao

[Anonymous No.12055301]

>>12055155
do you really think rationality can answer everything?
>>12055232
who?

[Anonymous No.12055336]

>>12055147
What is it that man absolutely must do? How do you determine that?

[Anonymous No.12055368]

>>12055301
why why bother writing any of this down if you cant even explain it, or support it under any scrutony. Your own argument falls to your own logic and you can't defend it. I might as well say that 'I solved every philosophical argument but im too cleaver to explain it :)'

>>12055301

[Anonymous No.12055433]

>>12055368
he has to use his phone and he doesn't have time to read 101 material on the subject so it's okay

[Anonymous No.12055628]

>>12054135
Fucking moron

[Anonymous No.12055758]

>>12055368
i explained a lot while you're just here, calling me out>>12055628
very happy to see i've triggered some reddit tier faggots

[Anonymous No.12055775]

>>12055368
its obvious that rationality is only a tool, which cannot calculated all of human experience, and i'm suppose to be the one debating your position? it is difficult to know if you are only a troll