M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
Why am I not You? Why is my consciousness not your consciousness?
- Status
D
ddarko
Guest
Well, its kind of ironic that you are asking this question with the hope that someone who is NOT you on this forum would answer you 
If you don’t know something, the most likely answer then is that I probably don’t know either if I am just a shared consciousness 
… or unless you know what I am about to write sub-consciously 
On a serious note, I would say its a truth you hold like a metaphysical truth or basic belief i.e. other minds exists and the people you see and talk to are actually real. I don’t think there is any way of proving anyone else as having a mind other than yourself and God (like in the brain in a vat case (link below)).
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0605uan.asp
I look at is as why we need faith. We do not know others have minds. But once we accept they do, we interact with them and come to a deeper appreciation of them as individuals. At some point in time, you would say your wife is certainly NOT your imagination and she is truly a person and that you would die for her.
Similarly, when you accept God and Christ, you pray to them, and your relationship grows. At some point, you know strongly that God and Christ do exist apart from any philosophical or scientific proof and you would die for your faith.
I am not a philosopher but that is how I view it with what little philosophy I know
God Bless
If you don’t know something, the most likely answer then is that I probably don’t know either if I am just a shared consciousness … or unless you know what I am about to write sub-consciously On a serious note, I would say its a truth you hold like a metaphysical truth or basic belief i.e. other minds exists and the people you see and talk to are actually real. I don’t think there is any way of proving anyone else as having a mind other than yourself and God (like in the brain in a vat case (link below)).
catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0605uan.asp
I look at is as why we need faith. We do not know others have minds. But once we accept they do, we interact with them and come to a deeper appreciation of them as individuals. At some point in time, you would say your wife is certainly NOT your imagination and she is truly a person and that you would die for her.
Similarly, when you accept God and Christ, you pray to them, and your relationship grows. At some point, you know strongly that God and Christ do exist apart from any philosophical or scientific proof and you would die for your faith.
I am not a philosopher but that is how I view it with what little philosophy I know
God Bless
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
Why does the universe exist? Why is there evil? Why was my dog Charlie a dog and not a human? Why do some die young and some die old?
These are all existentialist questions, and they all go back to God and His choice to create us. To get the answer, you’d have to ask Him. In the meantime the closest you can go is faith.
For me, existentialism is the closest philosophy gets to Christian faith. When it is all said and done, most people “exist” and that’s about it. If another blog site was correct, then according to the US Census Bureau, about 150,835 people die every day around the world. By the end of next week, a million people alive today will be dead.
How many of them did you know about, who died today for example? Not many, if any. But they “existed”.
S
Spirithound
Guest
If you mean “why”, you should ask God.
If you mean “how do i know”, I’ll think about it.
R
ronnie_bonigli
Guest
kind of reminds me of a passage I read in Roger Penrose’s *The Emperor’s New Mind *a couple of years ago. I’ll c&p below;
An idea frequently discussed in this kind of context is the teleportation machine of science fiction. It is intended as a means of ‘transportation’ from, say, one planet to another, but whether it actually would be such, is what the discussion is all about. Instead of being physically transported by a spaceship in the ‘normal’ way, the would be traveller is scanned from head to toe, the accurate location and complete specification of every atom and every electron in his body being recorded in full detail. All this information is then beamed (at the speed of light), by an electromagnetic signal, to the distant planet of intended destination. There, the information is collected and used as the instructions to assemble a precise duplicate of the traveller, together with all his memories, his intentions, his hopes, and his deepest feelings. At least that is what is expected; for every detail of the state of his brain has been faithfully recorded, transmitted, and reconstructed. Assuming that the mechanism has worked, the original copy of the traveller can be ‘safely’ destroyed.
Of course the question is: is this really a method of travelling from one place to another or is it merely the construction of a duplicate, together with the murder of the original? Would you be prepared to use this method of ‘travel’ assuming that the method had been shown to be completely reliable, within its terms of reference? If teleportation is not travelling, then what is the difference in principle between it and just walking from one room into another? In the latter case, are not one’s atoms of one moment simply providing the information for the locations of the atoms of the next moment? We have seen, after all, that there is no significance in preserving the identity of any particular atom. The question of the identity of any particular atom is not even meaningful. Does not any moving pattern of atoms simply constitute a kind of wave of information propagating from one place to another? Where is the essential difference between the propagation of waves which describes our traveller ambling in a commonplace way from one room to the other and that which takes place in the teleportation device?
Suppose it is true that teleportation does actually ‘work’, in the sense that the traveller’s own ‘awareness’ is actually reawakened in the copy of himself on the distant planet (assuming that this question has genuine meaning). What would happen if the original copy of the traveller were not destroyed, as the rules of this game demand? Would his ‘awareness’ be in two places at once? (Try to imagine your response to being told the following: “Oh dear, so the drug we gave you before placing you in the Teleporter has worn off prematurely has it? That is a little unfortunate, but no matter. Anyway, you will be pleased to hear that the other you- er, I mean the actual you, that is- has now arrived safely on Venus, so we caner dispose of you here er, I mean of the redundant copy here. It will, of course, be quite painless.” )
J
JimG
Guest
The question is interesting because it highlights the idea of “person.” A rock or a desk would not ask the question because even though it is a distinct entity, it’s nature is not summed up and expressed as a subject, that is, an entity with an essence which is expressed as a self-aware individual.
Nature or essence can be said to answer the question “What is it?” while person answers the question Who is it? Everything has a what but not everything has a who.
Even an animal, say a cat or a dog, contrary to our anthropomorphic thinking, does not express its nature in personhood. They have consciousness, awareness, which still does not rise to the level of self-consciousness or self-awareness. The are conscious, but not conscious of their consciousness. We experience this state ourselves, when we are not thinking of our thinking.
So I guess that I am not you because the expression of my human nature results in a personhood which is entirely unique and distinct.
(The question of why this essential individual aloneness pushes us toward socialization and togetherness leads to a whole other course of thought!)
Nature or essence can be said to answer the question “What is it?” while person answers the question Who is it? Everything has a what but not everything has a who.
Even an animal, say a cat or a dog, contrary to our anthropomorphic thinking, does not express its nature in personhood. They have consciousness, awareness, which still does not rise to the level of self-consciousness or self-awareness. The are conscious, but not conscious of their consciousness. We experience this state ourselves, when we are not thinking of our thinking.
So I guess that I am not you because the expression of my human nature results in a personhood which is entirely unique and distinct.
(The question of why this essential individual aloneness pushes us toward socialization and togetherness leads to a whole other course of thought!)
L
Luke_K
Guest
Simply by definition. “I” is not “you” just like red is not green, and this is not that. If I were you, I would not be I.
S
slywakka250
Guest
Maybe you are me, and we share part of the same universal consciousness; we simply have not evolved enough to be aware of this fact.
interesting question. Now that I think of it, I think it is kind of strange that we seem to all be separated from each other so much.
Two souls trying to communicate can do so only through the physical plane, using their bodies.
As spiritual creatures, there must be some sort of communication or oneness that occurs beyond the physical. I’m not sure.
interesting question. Now that I think of it, I think it is kind of strange that we seem to all be separated from each other so much.
Two souls trying to communicate can do so only through the physical plane, using their bodies.
As spiritual creatures, there must be some sort of communication or oneness that occurs beyond the physical. I’m not sure.
K
Katholish
Guest
In purely spiritual beings like the angels, the principle of differentiation is found in the nature of the being. Thus, we understand that each angel is its own species.
In human beings, who are both spiritual and material, the principle of differentiation is not found in nature. In fact, all human beings share the same human nature (i.e. we are all the same species). So what makes one man distinct from another? The answer is matter, i.e. the body. You have your body and I have mine, and since no soul can enform two bodies simultaneously, our bodies have two different forms.
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
This tells me why there are individual bodies, but that doesn’t tell me why I am not you. Why am I not God? why is God God and me me? What determines this fact?
T
The_Exodus
Guest
I’m not sure what you mean by “determines,” but you are already admitting it’s truth (I am me, you are you) in your question.
K
Katholish
Guest
It actually tells you why we are individual souls. How does that not answer the question?
The question “Why am I not you?” translates into “why am I this body/soul composition and not that body/soul composite?” The principle of differentiation explains this.
Asking why we are not God is a meaningless question. You are not God because you do not have a divine nature. If you had a divine nature, you wouldn’t be “you” anymore, there would just be God.
It is like asking why a square isn’t a circle. I can point out the difference in forms, but if you are looking for something other than formal difference, you are looking for something that is non-sensical.
L
Luke_K
Guest
You’re making this more complicated than it is by being overly philosophical. Whoever is MindOverMatter2, IS MindOverMatter2, and will naturally ask why he is MindOverMatter2 instead of someone else, although it is just true by definition. If he were someone else, he would not be MindOverMatter2 and would naturally ask why he is not MindOverMatter2.
Imagine the color red asking why it is red and not green.
Exactly.
L
lemondiesel
Guest
Because our consciousness is based on our experiences.
Our experiences are taken through the senses, in the physical body.
“Try walking a mile in my shoes.”
I
inocente
Guest
We have different DNA and life experiences.
Those experiences mean that the “you” who started this thread was different to the “you” reading this post, while unlike any of us God never changes.
J
JDaniel
Guest
MoM:
I. Every soul consists of its own consciousness and individuality.
II. But, I am a soul.
III. Therefore, I consist of my own consciousness and individuality.
God bless,
jd
M
MindOverMatter2
Guest
Yes but why am i not your consciousness and individuality?
Is that determined by something physical? If not then what, and would that make for a good argument for the existence of the soul and a transcendent intelligence which determines the unique individual soul?..:ehh:. To say that it is just physics that individuates or divides the soul or conciousness would suggest that there is one soul that is divided by physics, which is not to me a correct notion.
I am not saying this is an argument that works, i don’t know…just thinking i suppose.
J
JDaniel
Guest
MoM:Yes but why am i not your consciousness and individuality?
Is that determined by something physical? If not then what, and would that make for a good argument for the existence of the soul and a transcendent intelligence which determines the unique individual soul?..:ehh:. To say that it is just physics that individuates or divides the soul or conciousness would suggest that there is one soul that is divided by physics, which is not to me a correct notion.
I am not saying this is an argument that works, i don’t know…just thinking i suppose.
Here is some interesting information to help you figure out just exactly what it is you want to figure out:
nytimes.com/2006/03/05/books/review/05saletan.html
However, we are still left with the fact that the differentiation of individual humans - and, probably some of the higher animals - remains a mystery. It seems that the smaller the quanta, the less individuated they are. Some individuation is on the purely physical level. Some is noticeably not.
Angels are individuated such that each is referred to as its own species. Yet, Paramecia appear to have no noticeable differences. Can this be blamed on mere descendant or ascendant complexity? I don’t think it can. It is also obvious that it cannot be blamed on DNA, or DNA markers. Hmmm?
You may have something here.
God bless,
jd
I
inocente
Guest
I seem to remember Aquinas saying that all creatures are body and soul, but only humans have immortal souls. The soul could then be seen as integral with the body while we’re alive, just another term for “body”, and so would be shaped by things like our DNA and experiences.
Or my memory may be playing tricks, but either way it may be worth you checking-out what he says.
B
BlueShadow123
Guest
Why are you not God?
How is he possible, where did he come from?
Little questions like that we can’t answer. You may think you have an answer but you can’t prove it.
Just wait till your dead, then ask him when you see him. I know I will ask him where he came from. He doesn’t have parents, so, I have no idea.
I guess I just don’t understand how something could ‘always be there’.
Because I am a human and from what I know and see, everything has a beginning and an end. So I don’t know. To humans, time is everything. If God doesn’t have time, it would be pretty hard to understand him.
But the bible also says that a day here is a thousand years in heaven, so maybe he does have some sort of time. If hes God he can do anything and have anything he wants. If he wants time, he will have time.
How is he possible, where did he come from?
Little questions like that we can’t answer. You may think you have an answer but you can’t prove it.
Just wait till your dead, then ask him when you see him. I know I will ask him where he came from. He doesn’t have parents, so, I have no idea.
I guess I just don’t understand how something could ‘always be there’.
Because I am a human and from what I know and see, everything has a beginning and an end. So I don’t know. To humans, time is everything. If God doesn’t have time, it would be pretty hard to understand him.
But the bible also says that a day here is a thousand years in heaven, so maybe he does have some sort of time. If hes God he can do anything and have anything he wants. If he wants time, he will have time.
- Status