Descartes was just being a nerd, subjectivity isn't downstream of language, lots of people have memories of preverbal experiences, i do if he weren't so big a nerd it'd be "i experience therefor i am" i mean experiencing things in the idiomatic sense not the one from that page
-
-
id argue subjectivity requires more than just memory, it requires a notion of selfhood, a subject and the colloquial usage of experience seems like either attention-to-perception (implying pattern/thing recognition) or else narrative self-insertion which implies a subject
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
i don't think it does, i think experience comes first and we learn actually much, much later to assign those experiences to a persona-identity-history those things may be implied by the usage, yeah, which is a reason why the usage is a halfassed tool to use to point to the thing
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
experience as pure pattern recognition doesn't necessarily require a subject, it's sort of like the subject emerges slowly as a higher level pattern above the experienced patterns... but at what point does a baby become conscious?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
real damn early, i claim raw conscious experience is the ground from which all this pattern recognition (construction) and identity boundary formation emerges, the fancy architecture depends on it, it does not depend on the fancy architecture
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I see, I guess I would personally call that something other than consciousness (maybe perception, what Jaynes accused Russell of doing) but also these words all fucking suck, a better route would be clarifying metaphors or topologies but it's too late at night for me to do that
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
it helps if you kick all connotations derived from "self-consciousness" out of "consciousness" i.e. consider that the "self-" is there for a reason and is an important differentiation
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I'd define self-consciousness as the application of consciousness (directed symbolic processing for which "you" are the subject) toward oneself as object, don't see a problem here
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
i would not identify directed symbolic processing for which "you" are the subject as consciousness i would peg that as like the second or third emergence layer from baseline consciousness
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I might agree that it's like one level lower at the "relationships between abstract structures/signifiers parsed out of perception" level but the caveat here is that I desperately do not want to acknowledge that animals other than humans are conscious lol
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
ohh lol yeah if you want to deny that then you definitely need to pretend that everything only starts up at the ruach or neshamah and just shuffle that nefesh under the rug
-
-
im gonna draw some diagrams and get back to you, maybe, god damnit i have to read about Racism instead, ok goodnight! thanks for the back n forth!
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
you bet and back atcha! you too
@oimoiles!1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.