Stuff To Blow Your Mind: Bonus: R. Scott Bakker, Consciousness & Consult

  • 20 Replies
  • 657 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 1936
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #15 on: October 04, 2017, 05:28:41 pm »
I'm fairly sure subconscious or unconscious - especially citing Kahneman - are the same term, whichever is in fashion now.

Probably true, I'm not all that familiar with that source, I tend to think in the more Jungian analytical psychology ways I once knew.  The destinction being unconscious things are thing that are not readily (or even possibly) available to the consciousness, subconscious being things that aren't conscious but can be at will.

For example, breathing as subconscious, beating your heart as unconscious.
“I am a warrior of ages, Anasűrimbor . . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury.” -Cet’ingira

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 4928
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #16 on: October 04, 2017, 05:44:45 pm »
I'm fairly sure subconscious or unconscious - especially citing Kahneman - are the same term, whichever is in fashion now.

Probably true, I'm not all that familiar with that source, I tend to think in the more Jungian analytical psychology ways I once knew.  The destinction being unconscious things are thing that are not readily (or even possibly) available to the consciousness, subconscious being things that aren't conscious but can be at will.

For example, breathing as subconscious, beating your heart as unconscious.

Right. Freud and Jung are the province of philosophers now. I mean, you could only have been a handful of years ahead of my psychology degree but it seemed to me that psychology recently prefers to use subconscious (or whatever number of other operationally defined terms) to unconscious.

As to your example, I see what you're getting at as we can breathe consciously (though flawed as well because people can learn to influence their heart rate in much the same way) but ultimately the brain stem dictates both those processes, no consciousness necessary.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2017, 06:01:01 pm by Madness »
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

profgrape

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Great Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 375
    • View Profile
« Reply #17 on: October 04, 2017, 06:25:24 pm »
FWIW, I used "unconscious" to mean "non-conscious" or "non-cognitive". 

TheCulminatingApe

  • *
  • Suthenti
  • *
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2017, 07:30:51 pm »
Ascribing the sun rising to a Sun God is Meaningful; Heliocentrism, on the other hand, is not Meaningful, it just "is".

A similar concept is expressed in The Hogfather https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hogfather-Discworld-Novel-20-Novels/dp/0552167584.
Specifically this:http://www.incitingariot.com/2011/06/importance-of-belief-or-sun-is-not-ball.html "if the Hogfather does not make his rounds on Hogswatch (the Christmas equivalent), and belief in the Hogfather dissipates, then the sun will not rise tomorrow. That’s right. The fate of the world hangs on getting presents one night a year.
The entire movie revolves around this idea. They must save the Hogfather, along with appearances by a few other mythic beings, or else the sun will not rise. But, towards the very end of the movie, the meaning of this statement gets a bit of a twist. Death has a granddaughter, naturally, and her name is Susan. She asks her dear old granddad to expound on what would happen instead of the sun rising. Death tells her “a burning ball of gas would illuminate the Discworld
"

[EDIT Madness: Fixed italics/bold tags.]
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 04:23:04 pm by Madness »
Sez who?
Seswatha, that's who.

TheCulminatingApe

  • *
  • Suthenti
  • *
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2017, 07:42:35 pm »
(click to show/hide)

I'm pretty sure I've an interview with Bakker where he says the task of the fantasy author is to create meaning out of something that has no meaning (or something similar) - i.e. making us care about things/ places that don't and never have/ never will exist.
So... in the Second Apocalypse, he has made meaning out of something meaningless, by way of bringing meaninglessness to something meaningful 8).  No wonder Kellhus went mad :D!
Sez who?
Seswatha, that's who.

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 4928
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #20 on: October 05, 2017, 04:23:56 pm »
...

I love Pratchett. If MG were around he'd tell you that he annually watches/reads Hogfather to his daughter.

Aside, a lecture that profgrape linked to me regarding Bakker's references to Lawrence, AI, and System Zero - System Zero: What Kind of AI Have We Created?
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer