Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Personal' started by Duke of York, Nov 21, 2016.
What parts you got?
No 'Great Mystery' there, just a few 'don't know's.
"Great Mystery" is not an invocation of the supernatural, it's a simple statement of truth regarding our knowledge of consciousness. We are stumped. And if you think otherwise then please accept that you are going against the grain of scientific opinion.
If you're in combat, the adrenaline kicks in. When the action's moved on it's a different matter.
I suspect that scientific opinion may disagree.
So do cats.
From too much love of living, from fear of death set free,
We thank, with brief thanksgiving, whatever gods may be,
That no life lives forever, that dead men rise up never,
That even the weariest river winds somewhere safe to sea.
Wish I could remember who wrote that. Don't think it was Walt Whitman.
Immanuel Kant was a real p*ssant who was very rarely stable,
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy be**ar who could think you under the table,
David Hulme could out-consume both Schopenhauer and Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery schwein who was jusht ash schlosched as Schlegel.
There's nothing Nietsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist.
Socrates himself was permanently p*ssed.
John Stuart Mill of his own free will on half a pint of shandy was particularly ill,
Plato, they say, could put it away, half a crate of whisky every day.
Aristotle, Aristotle was a b*gger for the bottle, Hobbs was fond of his dram,
And René Descartes was a drunken f*rt 'I drink, therefore I am'.
Or in other words, the question is: do "I" survive the death of my body?
The questions are: what is this "I"?
And: if "I" do survive, what then?
And: Is religion just the perfect con-trick, in that if the promise isn't kept, "I" can't return to claim my stake back?
Yes, but the adrenaline always kicks in when you're in danger, no matter where you are. I'm only relating what experts have offered from their observations of wounded people in war zones and at home.
Others have offered alternative opinions, such as soldiers are braver than civilians, so pain doesn't affect them as much, but I regard that as less plausible than the explanation of the perception of what could be lost as a result of the injury and the degree to which this will enhance the pain.
I'm not an expert in matters like this. Better explanations are very welcome.
And you got the first line slightly wrong
As @Didactylos4 said, other opinions may disagree; there are compelling arguments for life and consciousness being inevitable emergent qualities) , but let's assume 'we are stumped'; what do you think that tells us about consciousness that some of us are missing?
You can't cut butter with butter?
BTW It is perfectly possible for consciousness to be an inevitable emergent phenomenon and be a Hard Problem to analyse.
Your tone implies that you are not actually stumped, yet you appear to have little light to shed.
Most scientists think it is the former (or more accurately, an adaptive system developed in many animals and some reptiles as a necessary survival mechanism
You're shifting your goal post a little; from 'stumped' to 'difficult to analyse'. Anyway, I find the idea of consciousness emerging and developing through the mechanisms of evolutionary advantage to be consistent with what is known.
And it is entirely possible to cut butter with butter
It's easy to understand how consciousness is useful. And it's only slightly difficult to spell too.
Yes. A poet I rate perhaps lower than he deserves. Serves me right for quoting from memory.
I confess I only know it by heart as I had to recite it (in it's entirety) frequently after misquoting it to a rather agéd and somewhat grumpy teacher in my youth.
He pointed out that if I was going to mock the elderly I should, at least, do it accurately.
Something I thank him for as it has been a comfort on many occasions since
There is actually some physical truth in our uniqueness from an experiential basis - namely the brain is "plastic" - it is changed physically by experience and by how we tend to think because of the way neurons form and behave. However, plasticity continues throughout life, and so the mould(y) can always be broken. Living one's life well is, perhaps, the art of balancing the comfortable and familiar with the novel and the challenging...
Perhaps the essential problem is that we haven't defined our terms. And having gladly extracted the smelly yellow liquid from previous posts, perhaps I ought to offer some daffynitions:
1. awareness/realisation: the non-automatic, conscious thought processes which a living being applies to itself and its environment.
2. Self: the awareness of a living being that it is a discrete entity, not an element or appendage of another entity or group of entities.
3. Soul: the intangible aspect of the self, contained within the body yet not realised as a physical element of that body, which is believed to survive the death of the body.