Consciousness

[disrupter]

This thought popped into my head today.

[animal?] 'Consciousness is a[n embedded] raw edge.'
perhaps focused,
maybe in 'conflict' with itself [looped back on (across) itself] [chewing on itself?]
Almost certainly kinetic. [maybe fuzzy between kinetic/potential & somewhat reversible?]

I am sort of thinking sleep [unconsiousness?] is a 'finished' edge/quantity/mass [(very?) stable chemistry].

So it would be sort of a 'live' raw edge embedded in & perhaps focused [intensified] within some context [frame?] of lesser or un/non-conscious matter.

perhaps, most often sustained in some quasi-concentric cyclic [looping, spiral] arrangement.
it would be kind of gyroscopic wouldn't it?

like an edge of unfinished/unsettled chemistry that has [a generally] continuous reaction with oxygen.

I wonder if there are other possibilities that might not include oxygen in the equation? some systematic 'continuous' reaction system.

I suppose it has a quasi-irreversibility to it?
at least ordinarily contextually speaking.

would sub-consciousness be a preparatory state or would it be a low-level oxidative consciousness? Or maybe an extenuated mix of both?

Like a slow tripping of staged dominoes. And the more you can stack & the slower they fall the more 'powerful' [thoughtful?] the consciousness is?
Included in that is grander orders & organization patterns.
More configurations of patterns respond to various differentiated subtle events of the exo-universe.

Running cyclic alternative test runs sort of acting as an imagination?
running sort of a reversible kinetic action strings?

Of course all this has to go on in a kinetic universe, where some immediate response requirements out-prioratize it.

Our [& some animals] use of altered states of consciousness might be attempts to elaborate, slow, suspend the state of our consciousness.

Now imagine people, beings, organisms, that are purely dedicated to that intricate, subtle elaborations of biology/chemistry.
Like your brain is for your body.

wouldn't that be wild to have a class of dedicated 'thinkers'?

I am thinking if that were done reasonably well we might very well have a much better system/species.

[Hog Trash]

This thought popped into my head today.
Consciousness If this ever actualy does pop in your head, try not to worry about it, it probably won't last long.

[disrupter]

Hog Trash speaks from experience.

[disrupter]

I was also thinking on a related vein that,

the eye 'traps' light.

so all the neurological complexity 'traps' all sorts of things up to things like 'concepts'.

A configuration of light, sound, touch, smells, tastes hits some fuzzy target that sort of lights up "this is a [fill in concept]". Like an excitable pinball machine where you hit the right sequence of bumpers.

creating a sensitivity to all sorts of abstractions.
making me think much of our intellect might not even be 'created' by us, but is instead perhaps simply accessing some pre-existing medium or realm.

Like different sizes & types of Radio receivers/antenna pick up different ranges of frequencies & depending where they are pointed/directed specific signals.

sort of a fun notion is that our brains are like multidimensional receivers that are picking up signals/waves from an infinity of dimensions. Messages from the Aliens!
String theory, if true, makes that seem entirely plausible.

I have thought much of our 'creative' thinking may in fact simply be sensitization to subtle signals/ideas that freely transit/float/waft through the universe or greater realm.

I also wondered if what might be the concept of a car, is 'read' (received) by us to be some other translation like a ball point pen, or political, math or other concept.

Much as virtually all NP algorithms are readily [polynomically] translatable into one another.

Not dissimilar to how a diamond fractures light into its spectrum,
we receive a particular strata of something with much greater potential.
But might be like wildly [multidimensionally warped] into complete different perspectives of some single beautifully elaborate 'thing'.

Like floating deeper inside some amazing configured lattice*,
that might ultimately have no limits.

So what we pick up depends at least in some fundamental way what we have the capacity to 'pick up'. Our sensitivities.

I will be a bit pejorative here & suggest that a lot of organized religion is getting some nearly flatline signal like some TV test pattern. A Solid, clear & consistent signal but tragically not at all the ranges of rich possibilities.

Although compared to Infomercials I suppose the TV test pattern might actually be more rewarding to watch.

*lattice, (see lettuce) (joke)

[disrupter]

[all very sketchy]
preliminary thought;
sex happens [is enabled] when consciousness overlaps/intersects/kisses/merges-with psychology?

...............

is consciousness where psychology integrates/roots in/with [accesses?] biology?

i believe consciousness may be evolution leveraging biology using psychology.

rationality of consciousness probably comes after that, especially animate modular logic constructs/constructions, deconstructions.

rationality is often a window dressing for making more impressive psychological affectations.
People want to believe they/we are 'rational' more than they/we are actually rational.
absolute rationality is, i believe, static, inanimate.

It is psychology that enables the speed, agility, artfulness, granularity of our rationality,
not in any way the other way around.
That is not to say that rationality can't/doesn't support & sustain [stabilize?] psychology & consciousness over the longer term.

but from a purely biological standpoint i believe psychology and the art of it is more predominate.
if we observe the manner in which people argue, discuss, etc. it almost invariably is more about psychology than some absolute rationality.
Even our interest in rational, logic constructs is based on psychology.
rationalities are/act more like the foils [tools?] of our psychology.

We like the emotional roller coaster while we generally avoid the scrupulous accounting, bean counting.

I suppose it is possible you could leverage psychology using some form of rationality, but that sounds tedious [tortured?]. Maybe i just look at it from my own perspective, when there alternative workable operations, that don't occur to me because they are not how i [mostly, apparently] operate.

tangent:
words are like bits of quasi-cryptic-rationalities that sketch/support our psychological impressions.
If we shrunk down in size to where the size/magnitude of each word were huge, heavy, massive & slow & elaborated it wouldn't interface with our brains well.
so some sort of [supportable?] scale & speed relationship [orthogonality?] is probably optimal.
That could relate to learning to read &/or speak a [several] language(s).
The parent usually slows down the rate of data flow [as well as sweetening it up with delicious, exaggerated, engaging sonic variety] so the young [untrained] brain will better pick it up, (as well as wanting/desiring to pick it up)
until it becomes a high speed reflexive thing.

maybe if that was applied to adult [more mature brains] it might make learning new languages [different field skills] easier/faster?

when we have learned a high-speed skill it becomes sort of microtized, which enables us to skim it quickly,
rather than getting lost in the potential ponderousness of it.

Poetry may be where some people favor allowing the slower, more sensual, ponderousness of words & literature to be the sensory experience of it. The intent is possibly to view it from another speed/size/mass scale or perhaps it alternatively can be to experience strange meaning relationships of words or their sounds or rhythms. Hyperspeed might also be an alternative type of poetry.

For most of us though we favor speed & reasonable accuracy interpreting/extracting relevant content.

[Scumbag]

This thought popped into my head today.
Yeah, about 15 mins after you popped the dozen or so little white pills!