Consciouness vs Energy

As this conversation is evolving we are delving into some having more consciouness than others..in which, maybe, extra senses may be coming from . That which, we are starting to accept ..
Our Level of consciousness seems to mould who we are, how we see the world. How we learn,
The varying levels of consciouness we all seem to have make up part of our personality?
Would consciouness be part of our Soul? Is Soul another word for consciouness?
Because it seems to me the Consciouness seems to give life and Awareness to Energy... a concept given to the Soul.

I think you are giving the value of self-consciousness to consciousness. To be conscious is to be aware of your environment. To be self-conscious is to conscious of the self, and of course the environment, when not focused on the self... or am I just spitting hairs to most here?

I am pretty sure consciousness did not evolve but rather was spontaneous. The problem I run into is physical theory up to this point does not lead to consciousness. The second problem is I have not a single fact to base that statement on.

Dancing Bear said:

I was having a conversation with an aunt tonight about all this.. and was wondering about your views on this..

Are we Consciousness using Energy,
Or Energy Using Consciousness..???


Working with spirit I can see Where we are consciousness using energy, But then i thought but are we not energy as well.. Not just consciousness using energy , but a mix of both.. at times needing more energy for the task at hand.. both in spirit and physical..But energy and consciousness at the same time?

Would love some views..

Click to expand...

I am not sure if I addressed your original question, these are just my thoughts and have no bearing on the anything beyond me

It is true the more we "think" the more energy we utilize, but is thinking actually consciousness? A fly reacts to its environment, even a single cell creature reacts to its environment all using the same BASIC system of chemical electrical response. After all, a function of life and a part of the definition includes homeostasis and that would take responding to changes in ones environment (temperature). Responding to a change in temperature in itself does not mean life (bimetallic metals respond to temperature) but if the only way to respond to this temperature is to expend more energy then this entity needs to take in energy to make this change and we are one step closer to life, that is called "work".. but the definition of consciousness has not been affected. Now add the ability to reproduce, respond and adapt. We have life. All these things can take place mechanically, that is they do not take a thought, but just a reaction. I feel this is the cusp of consciousness, but what "clicks" to make us conscious (self aware as we are already responding to our environment). I feel very strongly that there is life without self-consciousness. I am not sure there is self-consciousness without the matrix of matter we call "me". I can tell you why this is important to me: there will be no universal consciousness if "me" ceases without my matrix..and of course curiosity! It makes me do a lot of dumb and smart things.

LET'S LOOK AT A DEAD BODY, inert, so it's said , Spirit has left . NO, not so, in order for it to break down it needs life,but life different to the life before. Consciousness is still in opperation, energy is still present,what happened to THAT OTHER. All the ingredients are still there that made it opperate. It should work. Do the maths , it's still all there. Whats missing now??

re-pete-a said:

LET'S LOOK AT A DEAD BODY, inert, so it's said , Spirit has left . NO, not so, in order for it to break down it needs life,but life different to the life before. Consciousness is still in opperation, energy is still present,what happened to THAT OTHER. All the ingredients are still there that made it opperate. It should work. Do the maths , it's still all there. Whats missing now??

Click to expand...

Simple, its source of energy is missing. There has been a breakdown in the power supply for what ever reason. It has used up its energy stores and has stopped taking in new sources (food). Systems have failed. I see this every day. The body has potential energy for other organisms to use, but it no longer is taking in any..so it can not function. It is dead. It is not aware of its environment, if not right away (the body) certainly in as little as an hours or two. I believe the body losses awareness at the second of death. I have seen many people die, so it is based on my perceptions of death, not science, beyond my own.

You are 1/2 way to describing a common argument put forth by a school of philosophers like Chalmers. "the Zombie" but rather then presenting a "dead body" he presents one without consciousness, but all physical systems are the same.( and thier needs... like food to be converted to energy ) I wonder if this is the point you are tying to make?

I remember looking at my mother being kept alive by a machine, everything working heart, the lungs needed help, but she was gone, body remained. It's funny, my mother and I had a strong pyschic bond..my other sisters were still talking to her still hoping, but I knew she was gone, even before they did the test..the body lived on, the spirit already gone. They kept her alive with the engergy that she did not have herself.

The crowned one said:

Simple, its source of energy is missing. There has been a breakdown in the power supply for what ever reason. It has used up its energy stores and has stopped taking in new sources (food). Systems have failed. I see this every day. The body has potential energy for other organisms to use, but it no longer is taking in any..so it can not function. It is dead. It is not aware of its environment, if not right away (the body) certainly in as little as an hours or two. I believe the body losses awareness at the second of death. I have seen many people die, so it is based on my perceptions of death, not science, beyond my own.

You are 1/2 way to describing a common argument put forth by a school of philosophers like Chalmers. "the Zombie" but rather then presenting a "dead body" he presents one without consciousness, but all physical systems are the same.( and thier needs... like food to be converted to energy ) I wonder if this is the point you are tying to make?

Click to expand...

Then what of the faster, there's no fuel there either, but the THING remains together. Then there's the broken hearted , that just decide to leave. no cause known as well. The deep medators are no longer conscious of their surroundings either. Are they dead? What about the stories where the person has been pronounced dead clinically only to returned days later. There's too many grey areas to say THAT IS THE WAY IT IS.

re-pete-a said:

Then what of the faster, theres no fuel there either, but the THING remains together. Then there's the broken hearted , that just decide to leave. no cause known as well.

Click to expand...

One: if you cross a line you do die, do not underestimate or over estimate our reseves...we are well designed, as a matter o fact our bodies are outdated for our diet..we still store fat for a rainy day LOL! We have not needed that skill in the richer nations and the richer people for thousands of years.

Two:It is will, that is the mind over body, we see it all the time, but usually in a positive light, not death. After all we all create our own reality based on perceptions. You gave the ROOT: Broken heart. Cause may have been seeing no future, others see past it, others get past it. They survive.

(Lucky for you I came in for a beer and checked posts. One hour to sun down )

Edit: you edited you post before I responded. I can think of three or four diseases/conditions off the top of my head that lead to pre-mature death diagnoses, and 2 that still happen today... way too often. A single example of disproof clears an argument. We have covered "back from the dead" my friend. But mostly as you say they are "stories"

What about a body that has received a blow that 'knocks em out' all the necessary's are there but no one's home. Where does that home keeper go. Coma is the same , where's the inn keeper.

re-pete-a said:

What about a body that has received a blow that 'knocks em out' all the necessary's are there but no one's home. Where does that home keeper go. Coma is the same , where's the inn keeper.

Click to expand...

Now we are getting somewhere. What makes you think the subconscious is a separate entity from the conscious? The unconscious was the word Jung preferred, but to some degree that is semantics.. We know both work at the same time but at different levels. If it was not for the sub-conscious I think the conscious mind would be overwhelmed by to much stimuli way too often. Your blow to the head has taken out the conscious mind. But what of the unconscious mind? I feel the unconscious mind is , beside many other things a multitude of temporarily obscured thoughts, idea's,images and impressions, that tho we can not "know" consciously, continue to influence our conscious minds and keep track of the external world when we are either too absorbed ( the TV fades out as you concentrate on a problem as does your peripheral vision...ON A conscious level) or as you say too "comatose". You, re-pete-a, enter a room, you do not recall why you are there but you unconscious mind guides your hand to the object of desire, suddenly your "know" what you came for, the sub-conscious mind has prompted you for reasons unknown and brought the thought from the depths of your subconsciousness to the superficial consciousness of moment to moment desire. The innkeeper never left, he is still working hard at keeping things going, but the patrons are now unaware of this as it is lights out and time to leave!