You need focal focus for processing thought if it was possible. We cannot focally focus on several things. Think of reading a hard text and listening to a hard speech in TV. Just try it and see that you could not put your full attention to both. You can only switch.What do you mean? You can see and smell at the same time, non? Both are conscious.
ICXC NIKA
Hard thinking is not the same as consciousness. Consciousness is far more basic. It is a sensory function of our bodies.You need focal focus for processing thought if it was possible. We cannot focally focus on several things. Think of reading a hard text and listening to a hard speech in TV. Just try it and see that you could not put your full attention to both. You can only switch.
You use all conscious capacity when you think hard. That is why it becomes hard for other to take your attention.Hard thinking is not the same as consciousness. Consciousness is far more basic. It is a sensory function of our bodies.
ICXC NIKA
From the metaphysical level, form is the principle whereby the matter has a particular structure. Matter is that which stands to be structured. It follows that matter is a principle of potency in a thing (matter can potentially be an indefinite number of forms). In contrast, form is the kind of thing that it is and no other.Of course the ability to think is related to form of matter. You cannot possibly think without form since thinking is nothing than processing information (information has form). But where is soul? Thomas however was right in his observation that the form is necessary for thinking.
Is this your argument?:I already provide an argument against the fact that we cannot process thoughts consciously. Do you have any counter-argument against that?
Let me try to put it in a more conventional form:It is impossible that we consciously do two tasks with full focus at the same time. Any process at least needs three elements, Y=F(X), where X is (name removed by moderator)ut, F is function and Y is output. This means that we cannot perform any task consciously hence thought pops up into put conscious mind when they are complete.
Are you conscious and have the experience at the same time?The act of experience is related to a conscious activity.
We cannot have unconscious experience. One of the factor for this ability is experience.
Do you have any control over your introspection?Introspection is a conscious activity whereas thinking is a unconscious activity.
Can some thoughts be right and others be wrong?No. Thoughts cannot be right and wrong at the same time.
Do you mean that “your” conscience is unconscious?The judgement is conscience and it is a unconscious activity.
The argument is as following: You at least need three elements to process a thought (as an example: a thought is right or wrong). We cannot process a thought consciously because we can be conscious of one thing (full focus) at any given time.Is this your argument?:
Thought is the result of a process. Any process leads to a physical state. Some of physical state could be thought, some memory, etc.Let me try to put it in a more conventional form:
Any process needs at least three elements, Y=F(X), where X is (name removed by moderator)ut, F is function and Y is output.
A task is a process
Therefore, a task needs at least three elements
Thought is a process
The process at least needs three elements.Therefore, thought needs at least three elements
I don’t understand why you bring conscience into discussion.Conscience is a process
Therefore, conscience needs at least three elements
If we perform two tasks simultaneously then at least three or four or five or six elements will be involved
Because we can be conscious of one activity/thing at any given time.How do you conclude from here that we cannot perform any task consciously?
Consciousness is the state of awareness. You can experience whenever you are conscious.Are you conscious and have the experience at the same time?
To be hones I don’t know. There is no way to prove that or have any evidence for that. I can have control on everything I do if I have a self otherwise everything is a simple chain of cause and effect.Do you have any control over your introspection?
Yes.Can some thoughts be right and others be wrong?
The process of conscience is unconscious but we could be conscious of its outcome.Do you mean that “your” conscience is unconscious?
Let’s assume that your statement “We can be conscious of one thing (full focus) at any given time” is true. Now, let that one thing be a thought. Therefore, according to this, we could be conscious of that thought.The argument is as following: You at least need three elements to process a thought (as an example: a thought is right or wrong). We cannot process a thought consciously because we can be conscious of one thing (full focus) at any given time.
St. Thomas Aquinas held that the person is an incomplete substance, and that the essence is the immaterial soul. The material body may cease to exist but no the soul.Of course the ability to think is related to form of matter. You cannot possibly think without form since thinking is nothing than processing information (information has form). But where is soul? Thomas however was right in his observation that the form is necessary for thinking.
Well, that is just an assumption. Doesn’t it? Does he have any proof or evidence?St. Thomas Aquinas held that the person is an incomplete substance, and that the essence is the immaterial soul. The material body may cease to exist but no the soul.
Yes, you are conscious of one thought and that consume all your conscious capacity so you cannot process thoughts.Let’s assume that your statement “We can be conscious of one thing (full focus) at any given time” is true. Now, let that one thing be a thought. Therefore, according to this, we could be conscious of that thought.
Good luck to you too.Never mind, I wish you luck in your unconscious search for truth!
Faith is the proof of things unseen. The Church teaches what was revealed by God.Well, that is just an assumption. Doesn’t it? Does he have any proof or evidence?
Why he accepted something which is not necessary for human functioning? This causes doubt on his other philosophical arguments.Faith is the proof of things unseen. The Church teaches what was revealed by God.
The human being has both an incorruptible soul and a corruptible body. Each soul is suited for that body. When the body is dead, the soul continues to exist, and will be reunited to the resurrected body later. The soul is necessary for a human being (it makes the human being exist). The human soul is the form of the human body not the form of the matter of the human body.Why he accepted something which is not necessary for human functioning? This causes doubt on his other philosophical arguments.
You are not making an argument but just repeat your belief. You didn’t get my point. Human has form like any other things, such as animal, computer, a piece of rock, etc. The form implements how a thing functions. I cannot imagine a thing without form. The form in human being makes it what it is. The form in human is different from other form in other thing but all forms at the end are intrinsically same.The human being has both an incorruptible soul and a corruptible body. Each soul is suited for that body. When the body is dead, the soul continues to exist, and will be reunited to the resurrected body later. The soul is necessary for a human being (it makes the human being exist). The human soul is the form of the human body not the form of the matter of the human body.
But thoughts are processes, STT, don’t you realize it?Yes, you are conscious of one thought and that consume all your conscious capacity so you cannot process thoughts.
On the metaphysical level, form is the principle whereby the matter has a particular structure that it has, and matter is that which stands to be structured in a certain way (the implementation). I think you are using a different definition of form.You are not making an argument but just repeat your belief. You didn’t get my point. Human has form like any other things, such as animal, computer, a piece of rock, etc. The form implements how a thing functions. I cannot imagine a thing without form. The form in human being makes it what it is. The form in human is different from other form in other thing but all forms at the end are intrinsically same.
No, thoughts are not processes. Thoughts are the result of unconscious processes which happen in the brain. I already mention that: One thought completely consumes your conscious capacity if you fully focus on it. Just practice it. Can you understand what is happening in TV, radio, what your relatives are talking about, what you are thinking about, etc, etc. at the same time? You cannot.But thoughts are processes, STT, don’t you realize it?
To be aware of at least three things with full focus at the same time.What would you expect, in order to recognize that you think consciously?
I am sure that we cannot process thought consciously as it is discussed.Would you expect to be able to think: “I am going to think such and such”, before you think such and such?
I understand your definition and I totally agree with it. I am simply raising a question: Are different forms intrinsically different from each other? No. You can of course have different forms, but at the end the are simply forms.On the metaphysical level, form is the principle whereby the matter has a particular structure that it has, and matter is that which stands to be structured in a certain way (the implementation). I think you are using a different definition of form.
In the case of the soul and body, each rational soul is uniquely suited to that body, making it unique from another soul. The soul is an incomplete immaterial substance and the the intellect has no operation in common with the body.I understand your definition and I totally agree with it. I am simply raising a question: Are different forms intrinsically different from each other? No. You can of course have different forms, but at the end the are simply forms.