Living Consciousness
The Project of Consciousness
Lately I've been struggling with the fact that there are so many dedicated thinkers on the forum, and yet so much energy seems to get consumed in somewhat fruitless repartee, endless quibbling, angels on a pin. All the while, what is being talked about refers back to the nature of consciousness, because it is a product of consciousness. So even if the original thinkers themselves are unaware of it, every time they "enact" (say and do) something uniquely conscious, that gets written in the book of memories. That cultural residue accrues.
If my thought is alive now, then I read a book, all that living thought that I was becomes interlinked with the ideas in that book, whatever I am able to make of those ideas, and becomes my past, and also history. So now, having that different past than if I had not read that book, I myself am different than I might otherwise have been. In other words, being different, I become capable now of having different experiences than I would otherwise have had. Specifically, experiences that relate in some way to changes brought about by those specific past experiences. And so on.
I had an idea that consciousness is, in some sense equivalent with the idea of consciousness, the experience of consciousness, as it has evolved historically through culture. So the evolution of individual conscious awareness is linked with the evolution of the concept of consciousness. To the extent that consciousness succeeds in writing itself in the book of history, there it is. I thought it would be an interesting bridge between individual and collective thought.
And, if you think about it really hard, what are any of us at all but a tapestry of overlapping memories? Whatever the living moment is now, a second from now, it is gone. But if you and I are sitting together in a room, then that immediate past is a shared memory of the experience which you and I had together of the room, neither entirely mine, nor entirely yours. And we carry these shared objectivities around with us, and as we interact with other and different shared objectivities (people-histories), those bits and bits of conscious-existence get woven together, entwined in a memory which grows wider and deeper. And when that tapestry becomes rich and substantial enough, when the commonality of our shared history becomes a deep part of who we are, then we are a culture. And a cultural mind.
And it is this cultural mind that shapes, from beginning to end, the form and nature of our individual minds. And our individual thoughts. Because all of our meaning, whether of object or subject or neither, derives from and can only be expressed in the elements written into the cultural mind. That is thought. Individual and collective. That moment when Descartes actually conceived the thought "Cogito ergo sum" reverberates around now in the head of anyone who ever encountered it. Along with all the other great ideas that make us who we are, and make thought what it is.
Just so now and here, we are taking what is most urgently real, everything we have ever bothered to make ourselves, all of our most valued experiences brought to life in our living thought now in order to be able to "get that experience for which we are looking," the next great moment of thought.... We all bring our best to the table, I think.
Lately I've been struggling with the fact that there are so many dedicated thinkers on the forum, and yet so much energy seems to get consumed in somewhat fruitless repartee, endless quibbling, angels on a pin. All the while, what is being talked about refers back to the nature of consciousness, because it is a product of consciousness. So even if the original thinkers themselves are unaware of it, every time they "enact" (say and do) something uniquely conscious, that gets written in the book of memories. That cultural residue accrues.
If my thought is alive now, then I read a book, all that living thought that I was becomes interlinked with the ideas in that book, whatever I am able to make of those ideas, and becomes my past, and also history. So now, having that different past than if I had not read that book, I myself am different than I might otherwise have been. In other words, being different, I become capable now of having different experiences than I would otherwise have had. Specifically, experiences that relate in some way to changes brought about by those specific past experiences. And so on.
I had an idea that consciousness is, in some sense equivalent with the idea of consciousness, the experience of consciousness, as it has evolved historically through culture. So the evolution of individual conscious awareness is linked with the evolution of the concept of consciousness. To the extent that consciousness succeeds in writing itself in the book of history, there it is. I thought it would be an interesting bridge between individual and collective thought.
And, if you think about it really hard, what are any of us at all but a tapestry of overlapping memories? Whatever the living moment is now, a second from now, it is gone. But if you and I are sitting together in a room, then that immediate past is a shared memory of the experience which you and I had together of the room, neither entirely mine, nor entirely yours. And we carry these shared objectivities around with us, and as we interact with other and different shared objectivities (people-histories), those bits and bits of conscious-existence get woven together, entwined in a memory which grows wider and deeper. And when that tapestry becomes rich and substantial enough, when the commonality of our shared history becomes a deep part of who we are, then we are a culture. And a cultural mind.
And it is this cultural mind that shapes, from beginning to end, the form and nature of our individual minds. And our individual thoughts. Because all of our meaning, whether of object or subject or neither, derives from and can only be expressed in the elements written into the cultural mind. That is thought. Individual and collective. That moment when Descartes actually conceived the thought "Cogito ergo sum" reverberates around now in the head of anyone who ever encountered it. Along with all the other great ideas that make us who we are, and make thought what it is.
Just so now and here, we are taking what is most urgently real, everything we have ever bothered to make ourselves, all of our most valued experiences brought to life in our living thought now in order to be able to "get that experience for which we are looking," the next great moment of thought.... We all bring our best to the table, I think.
Comments (25)
But, in my mind, there is a problem there. Consciousness seems to be self interested - i cannot prove this but suspect it is true for us all. So the reality it creates. ( that we accept ) always favors the thinker - it would not aid survival otherwise.
So what seems to be happening in the forum is the reality of one consciousness conflicts with the reality of another consciousness.There is no getting over this impasse except for an individual to let go.
Only an enlightened person could do this, and would an enlightened person be on the forum at all?
But it seems such a small step simply to recognize that our own individual best interests are always, always best represented by every individual working his or her hardest towards the idea of the common good?
The common good of which group? (or set or category or space if you mathematically inclined as me).
I think the individual good and the good of all is closely connected.
In this world however , you then fall prey to the action of others?
I think improvement of oneself is necessarily subjective. We are all biased towards our own notions of what improves each of us.
Humanity is a big group which has subgroups within it which compete between them.
One can only do his own common good, and if he or she finds someone else to aid than the better, but we are all lonewolves in the end.
The ultimate goal seems to be a letting go of everything.Then you are free, and united with all humanity?
I think you can't have an individual without a collective, and vice-versa. So to me it only makes sense that an 'optimization' of the relationship should be possible.
Letting go is an apt expression. I came across a term while reading a book called "Yoga and Psychotherapy", it was "passive volition." I don't like when things become too esoteric though. But I do think that the ego tends to become a stumbling block on the path to 'enlightened cooperation'.
I'm a bit uncomfortable with esoteric stuff also, but I've independently formed a conception of consciousness,which I'm fairly confident in, and it agrees very well with Buddhist philosophy - I subsequently found out.
Also I've come across the opinion / fact that whilst in the west, consciousness is a recent consideration, in India it was first considered 5000 years ago, that was the first time the subconscious was conceived!
several hundred years ago they conceived the collective consciousness - but also 3 levels lower. They also have identified the super conscious and a number of levels higher. So I'm doing some research on all this stuff.
Theirs is a philosophy - it is logical and reasoned. - I have dismissed it off hand in the past thinking it would be like western religion, but I think now that I made a big mistake. Its very different.
It may be an integrated and unified philosophy of consciousness? But I am still learning and haven't formed a final view.
Yes, they might be, being enlightened does not change the need, or desire for debate. Also many cases of enlightenment as described in the religious accounts do not entail great intelligence or understanding, but rather an exhalted state. I have met gurus who are purported to be enlightened and they are no more intelligent than anyone else, though they do tend to be wise in some way.
I suggest you consider meditation, I say this because it can facilitate ones ability to capture in creative ways the experience of the experience of consciousness.
When it comes to cooperation, it can be done and has been many times in human history. But always decends into decadence and conflict eventually. Fingers crossed that we can survive the next few hundred years of turmoil.
It seems to me the collective mind has always existed, to some degree. Due to the meteoric expansion of our species, possibly we are now on the cusp of having to choose whether to consciously embrace our collective identity, or face the rather unpleasant alternatives which seem to lurk around every other corner.
The problem we have though is mass cooperation, something which will be required to pull through the difficult time ahead. It does feel like we are going backwards at the moment.
Yes, that is fascinating! The idea of this post was inspired by the notion that we are currently experiencing the results of our own (culturally embedded) conceptualization(s) of consciousness.