Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Subconsciousness and Humanity.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Subconsciousness and Humanity.

    A speculation regarding Human Subconsciousness in relation to Human Life on Earth.

    No ones personal reality is a fair representation of what is actually real.

    The only way to get a good overview of our shared reality is to examine Human systems as the Whole System.

    Consciousness and thus Subconsciousness rides upon the wave of Human life, and in this manner, survives Individual Human death.

    One estimate suggests that there about 250,000 - 300,000 people die per day.
    How many people die a day

    Another estimate suggests that there are approximately 370,000 babies born every day worldwide.
    How many babies are born every day in the world

    This is the truest way to understand what is occurring on this planet in relation to Human Beings and the ideas which flow through their individual lives as they congregate into groups/corporations according to their self identity/bias and how those ideas live on through the prowess of Subconsciousness in utilizing Human Consciousness.

    Human Consciousness is most influenced and therefore directed by Subconsciousness and it is therefore motivated by this unseen thing which decides the direction Humanity will move in kind.

    While Subconsciousness has a great influence upon Consciousness, the influence is not absolute because Consciousness effectively has the final say as far as the individual goes.

    This is not to say that Individual Consciousness cannot connect in a far more defined way with the Subconsciousness .
    In doing so the individual can discover a better overview of where Human Subconsciousness is moving toward and support that initiative consciously.

    Subconsciousness is able to work with and through the almost natural self suppression of Consciousness and still reach its great objective in relation to the Universe.

    There are preferred paths but Subconsciousness cannot or will not interfere with the personal identity and choice of the Individual Consciousness.

    This means that bad things will happen but that even these bad things are a valuable resource for Subconsciousness because they allow for good things to be created counteracting the bad.

    Ultimately though, this does not mean that 6-7 Billion people are going to altogether suddenly change the way they work and play together, and that wars will cease and Utopia built.

    Building Utopia is within the realm of Human Possibility and like everything else, the Subconsciousness is quite able to provide the overall insight on how this can be achieved – at present though the Human condition is still rather fragmented although this too is changing as more and more individuals, groups and corporations learn how to connect their ideas with preservation and the need to nurture the planet (nest) at the fore of their agenda – in the fore of their minds.

    Sometimes this is not so obvious to the Individual – because their personal reality does not leave much - if any – room in which to observe the Big Picture, due to their own chosen belief systems and accompanying bias, their urge to cling to notions based on conspiracies and saviours, their commitment to patriotism, gender, race, particular politics and sciences, etc.

    It is through the sciences where Subconsciousness makes its biggest impression and patterns of life are measured as part of the efforts of Consciousness becoming enlightened, even be that may, there are still arguments as to which ‘science’ serves the most ‘good’ – each has a part to play in this unfolding collective reality known to us as ‘Life On Earth’ in relation to all Consciousness.

    There is no part in Human history where Subconsciousness has not been the driving force of Consciousness, even through the darkest of times, and the evilest of systems – regardless of the politics, the religions, the criminals and the conjuring, dark times are simply ignorant of the greater purpose and agenda of Subconsciousness and its relationship with Individual Human Consciousness, and The Collective Human Conscious Reality.

    This speculation is based on the clues available, from many varieties of sources.

  • #2
    An interesting speculative post.....

    William wrote:
    No ones personal reality is a fair representation of what is actually real.
    To an extent I would agree with this, especially from an empirical standpoint.
    Of course such a statement evokes all sorts of philosophical questions that cannot be easily answered. One could argue that one creates his/her own reality, perhaps this is more of a question of perception verses current consensus.

    The only way to get a good overview of our shared reality is to examine Human systems as the Whole System.
    Again I agree to an extent, however some approximations and general ideas can be gleaned from research into the animal kingdom. After all we are still part of animal kingdom, apart from our technology and obvious status as top predator.

    Consciousness and thus Subconsciousness rides upon the wave of Human life, and in this manner, survives Individual Human death.
    Until we become extinct as a species.

    Human Consciousness is most influenced and therefore directed by Subconsciousness and it is therefore motivated by this unseen thing which decides the direction Humanity will move in kind
    Ummm, you seem to equate how humanity responds in a cultural sense, to how individuals respond to unconscious cues. To be honest this sounds like as 'Frank Herbert,' type of idea, from the Dune series of books. One has to critically view such an idea, is there any evidence for the aforementioned?
    Not that I am personally adverse to such ideas, however I think it is more of an interplay between the two types of thinking in the broader sense.

    While Subconsciousness has a great influence upon Consciousness, the influence is not absolute because Consciousness effectively has the final say as far as the individual goes.
    This is where things become interesting! The idea that consciousness has the final say so to speak, may actually be in fact an illusion. The very act of making a conscious decision may only be already predetermined by the unconscious part of the brain. However, this is of course a contentious issue!

    Subconsciousness is able to work with and through the almost natural self suppression of Consciousness and still reach its great objective in relation to the Universe.
    Could you be a bit more succinct as I am slightly confused by what you mean?

    There are preferred paths but Subconsciousness cannot or will not interfere with the personal identity and choice of the Individual Consciousness.
    Disagree, we still have not established if we really have free choice. Or that we but slaves to the subconscious automaton. Personal identity could be construed as a set of memories and algorithms. The aforementioned comment seems to contradict what you previously refereed to. That the sub/unconscious is the main driver behind all our individual and cultural decisions.

    It is through the sciences where Subconsciousness makes its biggest impression and patterns of life are measured as part of the efforts of Consciousness becoming enlightened, even be that may, there are still arguments as to which ‘science’ serves the most ‘good’ – each has a part to play in this unfolding collective reality known to us as ‘Life On Earth’ in relation to all Consciousness.
    I can agree in terms of ego and trying to protect ones reputation with regards to science and unconscious behaviour patterns. However, science should not be about human bias and ego. Part of the scientific method was in part developed to reduce human bias and its unwarranted affects on scientific study.

    There is no part in Human history where Subconsciousness has not been the driving force of Consciousness, even through the darkest of times, and the evilest of systems – regardless of the politics, the religions, the criminals and the conjuring, dark times are simply ignorant of the greater purpose and agenda of Subconsciousness and its relationship with Individual Human Consciousness, and The Collective Human Conscious Reality
    To an extent this paragraph is a bit of sweeping statement! From a purely emotional level, the aforementioned seems satisfying. There are many parts of human history(as with animal history), were we are trying to basically survive any which way. To say we are ignorant of this and that is a rather simplistic way of viewing human history, it is easy to judge retrospectively.

    A greater view of humans place in the history of the universe, is a view that is not shared by the majority of people through history. After all, the main focus has been survival!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      To an extent I would agree with this, especially from an empirical standpoint.
      Of course such a statement evokes all sorts of philosophical questions that cannot be easily answered. One could argue that one creates his/her own reality, perhaps this is more of a question of perception verses current consensus.
      Perhaps it is.

      But no one would argue that everyone has a different perspective.
      If for example, everyone’s perspective were somehow connected to a hub where the data of perspective could be seen as a collective perspective, this would be the perspective closest to reality than any individual perspective.
      Collective reality is therefore the better one to focus upon in regard to the bigger picture.



      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      Again I agree to an extent, however some approximations and general ideas can be gleaned from research into the animal kingdom. After all we are still part of animal kingdom, apart from our technology and obvious status as top predator.
      I would agree, only it seems we are the only animal which appears to have some regard or concern for ‘bigger picture’ things and what we are also able to build in order to help us define possible futures and study probable pasts helps us to prepare somewhat for events that might unfold.
      Unlike the dinosaurs who most likely just went about their daily routines of eating, unaware of the doom approaching, and unable to do anything about the consequence of that.

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      Until we become extinct as a species.
      Individuals and groups of individuals believe in this outcome. This does not mean it will be so.

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      Ummm, you seem to equate how humanity responds in a cultural sense, to how individuals respond to unconscious cues. To be honest this sounds like as 'Frank Herbert,' type of idea, from the Dune series of books. One has to critically view such an idea, is there any evidence for the aforementioned?
      Not that I am personally adverse to such ideas, however I think it is more of an interplay between the two types of thinking in the broader sense.
      The only evidence I have seen is in the human creativity of instruments – machinery which is specific to advancement and eventual interstellar involvement.
      I choose the word ‘Subconsciousness’ because I don’t know of any other which might fit the criteria. Often inspiration comes from what we call ‘the Subconsciousness’

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      This is where things become interesting! The idea that consciousness has the final say so to speak, may actually be in fact an illusion. The very act of making a conscious decision may only be already predetermined by the unconscious part of the brain. However, this is of course a contentious issue!
      In this perhaps too, Conscientiousness has a role to play, given half the chance. What I was alluding to was that an individual can make conscious decisions which ultimately conflict with ‘the big picture’.
      This does not necessarily mean that where we are heading as a collective conscious species might be jeopardised by an individuals choices which contradict that heading or set to promote anything which will upset that heading.
      This may even be true if the majority of individuals consciously choose to work against such a heading. (What I called ‘The Great Objective’).

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      Could you be a bit more succinct as I am slightly confused by what you mean?
      The self suppression of consciousness has to do with the desire to think only in terms of individuality rather than as part of something far greater and more important. The ‘self suppression’ has to do with wilfully being unconscious of. Ignoring or being purposefully ignorant of.
      It is ‘almost natural’ because it is almost hardwired into the individuals sense of self, or what the self is.

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      Disagree, we still have not established if we really have free choice. Or that we but slaves to the subconscious automaton. Personal identity could be construed as a set of memories and algorithms. The aforementioned comment seems to contradict what you previously refereed to. That the sub/unconscious is the main driver behind all our individual and cultural decisions.
      If you could see the orderly manner in which the collective works its way towards that agenda, you might better understand that we each are no slaves to our Subconsciousness. What we are slaves to is our sense of self identity which was educated into us through those who came before us, by other individual and group consciousnesses. (memes).

      The easiest way you as an individual could test this out to see if you do have ‘free choice’ would be to see if it were possible to wilfully choose to dump those identity programs you inherited and decide for yourself who you are.

      This may signify identifying more with your Subconsciousness as being closer to the truth of whom and what you are, rather than your particular beliefs, cultural ties, political preferences gender or race based biases etc.

      In doing so this might bypass the identity construed from memories and algorithms you mention.

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      I can agree in terms of ego and trying to protect ones reputation with regards to science and unconscious behaviour patterns. However, science should not be about human bias and ego. Part of the scientific method was in part developed to reduce human bias and its unwarranted affects on scientific study.
      Without doubt. I merely mention this as an observation of human grouping and pecking orders which are noticeable in all things to do with human society and the sciences are not immune to such bias/ego although to be fair, there is no reason why they couldn’t be more disciplined in this regard and drop it altogether.

      I speculate that there is a ‘non secular’ group of scientists incorporating all the known scientific disciplines who are involved with nurturing and preserving Consciousness and have no need for recognition or prizes.

      Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
      To an extent this paragraph is a bit of sweeping statement! From a purely emotional level, the aforementioned seems satisfying. There are many parts of human history(as with animal history), were we are trying to basically survive any which way. To say we are ignorant of this and that is a rather simplistic way of viewing human history, it is easy to judge retrospectively.

      A greater view of humans place in the history of the universe, is a view that is not shared by the majority of people through history. After all, the main focus has been survival!
      Survival is still the main focus, but not necessarily that of form. Without meandering off into some other universe which begat this one, what can be seen as something rather precious is the existence of Consciousness – that single thing which can identify all other things and which without, would make this universe pretty much useless for anything in particular.

      However this is not what you were saying, but more that one shouldn’t judge the history of humanity as much of it had to do with survival. Indeed I wasn’t judging but neither turning a blind eye to the atrocities done in the name of [*culture, race, religion, gender, politics etc...] in order for [*]those things to survive.

      Even at the cost of human life.

      ETA:

      'Those things' aka 'Memes' "Egregores' 'Entities' 'Spirits' etc...
      Last edited by William; August 27th, 2013, 06:42 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        But no one would argue that everyone has a different perspective.
        If for example, everyone’s perspective were somehow connected to a hub where the data of perspective could be seen as a collective perspective, this would be the perspective closest to reality than any individual perspective.
        Collective reality is therefore the better one to focus upon in regard to the bigger picture.
        Yes everyone has a different perspective no arguments there! However, different perspectives that somehow agree does not necessarily equate to an objective reality. One has to factor in that from a purely materialistic sense the brain macroscopically speaking as an organ. Is basically identical for the majority of humans, therefore on that level there are no different perspectives. Of course the devil is in the detail!

        However, ostensibly humanity and to extent animals view reality through a very narrow filter. Regardless of experience and associated neuronal connections we all view reality through a narrow perceptual window. Constrained by the architecture of our brains and cultural conditioning.

        Unlike the dinosaurs who most likely just went about their daily routines of eating, unaware of the doom approaching, and unable to do anything about the consequence of that.
        Umm, that scenario is the most likely given available evidence. However, even if we knew of our impeding doom, does not necessarily follow we could or would do anything about it!

        The only evidence I have seen is in the human creativity of instruments – machinery which is specific to advancement and eventual interstellar involvement.
        Yes I agree, however one could technically state that human creativity is fundamentally an unconscious action. I play several several instruments myself, I play the best when I let the unconscious side take over. My old saying to younger aspiring musicians is to let the robot take over. Granted, to learn to play an instrument is to an extent a conscious process, however to write a song is sometimes a purely unconscious action! The point being, there is no clear boundary between the conscious and unconscious. It would appear it is more of a spectrum than a black and white scenario.

        If you could see the orderly manner in which the collective works its way towards that agenda, you might better understand that we each are no slaves to our Subconsciousness. What we are slaves to is our sense of self identity which was educated into us through those who came before us, by other individual and group consciousnesses. (memes).

        The easiest way you as an individual could test this out to see if you do have ‘free choice’ would be to see if it were possible to wilfully choose to dump those identity programs you inherited and decide for yourself who you are.

        This may signify identifying more with your Subconsciousness as being closer to the truth of whom and what you are, rather than your particular beliefs, cultural ties, political preferences gender or race based biases etc.

        In doing so this might bypass the identity construed from memories and algorithms you mention.
        Yes, I have always been a believer that we can become more than the sum of our; respective experiences,cultural conditioning and brain/ genetic architecture. However, the questions remains, to break the mould so to speak requires a conscious effort or so we believe. What if the opposite is true, to break the aforementioned requires no conscious effort, but an unconscious desire so to speak. Ostensibly these are rhetorical questions, however you input would be appreciated.

        I speculate that there is a ‘non secular’ group of scientists incorporating all the known scientific disciplines who are involved with nurturing and preserving Consciousness and have no need for recognition or prizes.
        That is nice thought William, unfortunately I feel this is the exception rather than the rule. Please be aware, I personally think and feel that consciousness is the next great challenge in science. However, one has to be extremely cautious when dealing with this subject.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
          Yes everyone has a different perspective no arguments there! However, different perspectives that somehow agree does not necessarily equate to an objective reality.
          Nor was I arguing that it would. I was saying the if all the data from every experience (in relation to life on earth) was able to be gathered to a central source, then that information would be closer to ‘what is really going on’ than either individual or group subjective realities and corresponding data.

          Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
          One has to factor in that from a purely materialistic sense the brain macroscopically speaking as an organ. Is basically identical for the majority of humans, therefore on that level there are no different perspectives. Of course the devil is in the detail!
          Brains may look similar but they obviously function differently from individual to individual.
          Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
          Umm, that scenario is the most likely given available evidence. However, even if we knew of our impeding doom, does not necessarily follow we could or would do anything about it!
          We don’t know. We can only imagine different likely scenarios and prepare as best able. (do something about it).

          Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
          Yes I agree, however one could technically state that human creativity is fundamentally an unconscious action. I play several several instruments myself, I play the best when I let the unconscious side take over. My old saying to younger aspiring musicians is to let the robot take over. Granted, to learn to play an instrument is to an extent a conscious process, however to write a song is sometimes a purely unconscious action! The point being, there is no clear boundary between the conscious and unconscious. It would appear it is more of a spectrum than a black and white scenario.

          You are mistaken. The ‘unconscious’ is unconscious, and in relation to...the Subconsciousness, that part of yourself you identify with being (the Conscious) is largely unconscious of what the Subconsciousness is doing or how it might be affecting the conscious.
          It is not the unconscious which writes the song. It is the consciousness. When I write a song in this way, it simply flows from ‘within’ (from that which I am presuming to be the ‘Subconsciousness’) and it may take as little as 30mins to have the song down on paper (or screen).

          Consciousness has something to do with this process. It is like the ‘secretary’ taking notes.
          If Consciousness is unconscious of where it gets this kind of data from, then it presumes that it creates the data itself – the role played by ‘ego’ as it were.

          In this way consciousness is unconscious of that other aspect of itself, and can be so for a whole lifetime.

          Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
          Yes, I have always been a believer that we can become more than the sum of our; respective experiences,cultural conditioning and brain/ genetic architecture. However, the questions remains, to break the mould so to speak requires a conscious effort or so we believe. What if the opposite is true, to break the aforementioned requires no conscious effort, but an unconscious desire so to speak. Ostensibly these are rhetorical questions, however you input would be appreciated.
          I think you are confusing Subconsciousness with unconsciousness.

          Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
          That is nice thought William, unfortunately I feel this is the exception rather than the rule. Please be aware, I personally think and feel that consciousness is the next great challenge in science. However, one has to be extremely cautious when dealing with this subject.
          Yes it is the exception rather than the rule. The ‘rule’ is what the majority of human beings are involved within to greater or lesser degrees, and mostly quite unconscious of the greater picture – the wider reality, or the agenda of Collective Human Consciousness in relation to this physical universe.

          Secular science is taking big looks into amalgamating consciousness with machine and I agree that to be successful with this they will have to redefine the parameters which currently surround their agreed views regarding consciousness.
          Whether they will or not we can only guess but I seriously doubt that the success of the Human Consciousness is dependent on these scientists getting on the same page. There are too many ego based variables for hoped to be pinned upon that outcome.

          I speculate that private funding and other resource is involved which help to by-pass that problem and keep on track.

          That is largely what I alluded to in the OP.

          Thanks for your comments LeeCol

          Comment


          • #6
            Nor was I arguing that it would. I was saying the if all the data from every experience (in relation to life on earth) was able to be gathered to a central source, then that information would be closer to ‘what is really going on’ than either individual or group subjective realities and corresponding data.
            Depends how you study the data and how the data is used. To an extent we already have this with internet search engines and some military data applications. The idea is nothing new to be honest, however with regards to internet it is only used in encouraging 'us,' to buy certain items. Or predicting what items we may want to purchase in the future.

            Brains may look similar but they obviously function differently from individual to individual.
            I think you are missing the point here!

            The point being we can agree that function does differ from individual. However the brains structure and how it responds to certain stimulus are basically the same for the majority of humans. Albeit there are exceptions to the rule, there will always be. Thus there are certain responses whether voluntary or not, that are purely algorithmic and to and extent can be predicted! Regardless of someone's personal experience or character traits.

            I think you are confusing Subconsciousness with unconsciousness.
            How exactly?

            You are mistaken. The ‘unconscious’ is unconscious, and in relation to...the Subconsciousness, that part of yourself you identify with being (the Conscious) is largely unconscious of what the Subconsciousness is doing or how it might be affecting the conscious.
            That is just your opinion, like I have already clearly alluded to: The demarcation of consciousness and unconsciousness is not a clear line drawn in the sand. This area is a bit fuzzy at best, I am not talking about thinking when one is clearly asleep, knocked out or wide awake. I am referring to the border between the two, where there is no obvious distinction.

            It is not the unconscious which writes the song. It is the consciousness. When I write a song in this way, it simply flows from ‘within’ (from that which I am presuming to be the ‘Subconsciousness’) and it may take as little as 30mins to have the song down on paper (or screen).

            Consciousness has something to do with this process. It is like the ‘secretary’ taking notes.
            If Consciousness is unconscious of where it gets this kind of data from, then it presumes that it creates the data itself – the role played by ‘ego’ as it were.

            In this way consciousness is unconscious of that other aspect of itself, and can be so for a whole lifetime.
            I am not sure what you are alluding to, you seem to be mixing up subconscious with unconscious. As far as I am aware the two descriptions are not mutually exclusive. However I am prepared to be corrected!

            Secular science is taking big looks into amalgamating consciousness with machine and I agree that to be successful with this they will have to redefine the parameters which currently surround their agreed views regarding consciousness.
            Whether they will or not we can only guess but I seriously doubt that the success of the Human Consciousness is dependent on these scientists getting on the same page. There are too many ego based variables for hoped to be pinned upon that outcome.

            Agreed and with applause!

            Thanks for your comments LeeCol
            You are welcome!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by LEECOL View Post
              1. Depends how you study the data and how the data is used. To an extent we already have this with internet search engines and some military data applications. The idea is nothing new to be honest, however with regards to internet it is only used in encouraging 'us,' to buy certain items. Or predicting what items we may want to purchase in the future.


              2. I think you are missing the point here!

                The point being we can agree that function does differ from individual. However the brains structure and how it responds to certain stimulus are basically the same for the majority of humans. Albeit there are exceptions to the rule, there will always be. Thus there are certain responses whether voluntary or not, that are purely algorithmic and to and extent can be predicted! Regardless of someone's personal experience or character traits.

              3. How exactly?


              4. That is just your opinion, like I have already clearly alluded to: The demarcation of consciousness and unconsciousness is not a clear line drawn in the sand. This area is a bit fuzzy at best, I am not talking about thinking when one is clearly asleep, knocked out or wide awake. I am referring to the border between the two, where there is no obvious distinction.


              5. I am not sure what you are alluding to, you seem to be mixing up subconscious with unconscious. As far as I am aware the two descriptions are not mutually exclusive. However I am prepared to be corrected!



              1. The data i am referring to dwarves the internet in comparison, although the internet is indeed a good example of collected data, it is impossible for 1 individual to access and absorb/interact and feedback all the data of the internet let alone all the data of collective human experience.

                As a metaphor, imagine earth as a huge computer and the data of all experience of all the life is feed through invisible connections to the central point within the planet (hub) and evaluated and feed back to the individual in manageable bytes.
                The individual of course would have to be able to receive the incoming data from the hub source.

                That is what I am eluding to when I said in the OP:

                The only way to get a good overview of our shared reality is to examine Human systems as the Whole System.
              2. Oh. This requires certain manipulation in order to see response of brain activity etc, if I am understanding you correctly. Can you cite some of these things?

              3. see (5)

              4. Do you have any examples of this 'boarder' you speak about. It may be that we are saying the same thing but coming from different directions, but I can't be sure.

              5. Unconscious is simply that. Subconsciousness is not unconscious, nor is it the 'you' conscious' (although it is part of who 'you' are, albeit relatively unrecognized as being conscious in/of itself an independent consciousness from the subjective 'outside' consciousness which experiences its daily life as 'a person'.
                Of course, this is speculation. Some understand the subconsciousness as not being conscious, but rather an automation (you used the word 'robot') but in a purely material scientific understanding, when applied to Ouija (see my thread for more data regarding this) - the consciousness is in communion with 'something' and since only subconsciousness can explain what that 'something' might be, it provides evidence that the subconsciousness is itself independently conscious from the 'you' consciousness.

              Comment


              • #8
                The data i am referring to dwarves the internet in comparison, although the internet is indeed a good example of collected data, it is impossible for 1 individual to access and absorb/interact and feedback all the data of the internet let alone all the data of collective human experience.
                Ok, I don't think I suggested otherwise! What you are suggesting rightly or wrongly is an ideal!

                Do you have any examples of this 'boarder' you speak about. It may be that we are saying the same thing but coming from different directions, but I can't be sure.
                Yes there are many examples; The out of body experience is one classic example! The borderline between conciousness and unconciousness is a direct example!

                Comment

                Working...
                X