Philosophy Basics: Consciousness

Reading some Objectivist philosophy basics, metaphysics.

http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com

I think therefore I am.- Rene Descartes

Category:

Education

Tags:

• objectivism
• philosophically
• primer
• ontology

[e105b5]

Like it but I half disagree that consciousness needs something outside of it to exist, consciousness can imagine. It makes sense either way..

[Sepero1]

@e105b5

Yeah, I understand what you're saying, and I pretty much agree. To me, the importance of this passage is that consciousness exists, and that something must exist for consciousness to exist (primacy of existence).

[22jaykob22]

What does it mean to be conscious of consciousness then? This seems logically possible and yet, the act doesn't seem to require anything outside of consciousness itself.

This is flimsy philosophy at best. Typical Ayn Rand.

[Sepero1]

@22jaykob22

I may not understand fully what you mean. My interpretation of this, regarding the problem with Descartes, is that he did not believe/understand in the Primacy of Existence.

[22jaykob22]

@Sepero1

Robert Hollinger put it better than I did: "This clearly will not do. Unless Rand's philosophy can be supported by more than the four axioms cited above, or until it can be shown that these axioms support only her philosophy, it will be difficult to take her views seriously. That is, she must show that her remarks are not merely the banalities they seem to be."

[Sepero1]

@22jaykob22

With respect, I am inclined to disagree with you regarding the primacy of existence. Though, I do agree with Hollinger that these axioms do not fully support Rand's philosophy. In large part I agree with Rand on her axioms, but not with many of her derived conclusions from them.

[mikfsh]

Disagree, In order for something to be understood as existing, there must be a form of perception to accept such claim. Could not consciousness solely exist on the circumstances of 'it' understanding 'its' consciousness?

[22jaykob22]

@Sepero1

Regardless of whether or not Descartes got it wrong, the Primacy of Existence is NOT axiomatic. If it was so self-evident, it wouldn't be a staunch point of contention between philosophers or even every day people in the East and West. Even the ancient Greeks believed in metaphysical entities more primal than the material world itself. That's not to say Ayn Rand might not be right in her conclusions, but reducing the debate to an "axiom" is poor philosophy.

[DaveDoggOwns]

Not true. If everything you know is content from your own mind then how do you explain your inability to "will away" the universe or painful memories?

[hiawathabanias]

is Rene Decartes an atheist?