Re: consciousness

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:03:45 +1000, j.wilkins1@xxxxxxxxx (John
Wilkins) wrote:

Dick <remdickhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:27:25 +1000, j.wilkins1@xxxxxxxxx (John
Wilkins) wrote:

Dale Kelly <dale.kelly@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:57:06 +1000, John Wilkins wrote:

It's a process of processing


your premise is your conclusion

Not in this case. It's a matter of realisng that there are processes of
processes (like there are rates of change in rates of change). This is
not circularity but metalogic.

And with what did you "choose" to believe your "metalogic"?

Umm, could you rephrase the question?

The form of argument is a choice, isn't it?

We have so many components of our behavior (speech is behavior) that
involve choice. Sometimes we even review our choices in our
"consciousness" before putting the thought into action. Sometimes I
even edit what I write! <g>

In the face/vase choice, what is choosing the form to perceive? What
values change allowing the alternative image to emerge?

I know there are no answers. Vision, like thought, relies on forming
test forms, then accepting the best fit. My screen saver uses a data
base of art. When I look at a picture without my glasses, I often
only see a blur of color at first, then something in my head, comes up
with a trial picture. Once a recognizable choice is made, details
appear even though my eyes are still out of focus. Sometimes, the
first choice is discarded for a second, much like the face/vase image.

Words are containers for ideas. When you ask me to restate a
question, assuming an honest question, I must try to put together a
new set of words to contain the idea I am trying to express.
Hopefully, you will "try" (choice of intent) to form a meaningful
interpretation.

A recent book has a title something like: It is not what I say, but
what you hear.


.