Consciousness!...mans natural enemy?

1. 60

   qwarkposted 12 years ago

   Will the human characteristic "consciousness," become mans own "natural" enemy?
   All life on this planet has natural enemies which control the balance of life...except man.
   Is the anomaly "consciousness" by proxy I.e. the ability to destroy/control all jeopardizing threats, going to be a human characterist that will eventually reduce human existence to a "manageable" level of existence or destroy it completely?
   Anyone thought about this?

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      No! Consciousness is not man's enemy.
      
      Humanity's natural enemy is irrationality, because irrationality cause most of the strife.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I agree. But saying "irrationality" leaves too much open for attack--I think emotions, no matter their root cause and function are vital to psychology and the enjoyment of life.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Cags:
            C'mon!
            One cannot be "irrational" if one is not conscious.
            Irrational acts are a facet of a lower level of conscious thought and action.

            replyreport
            1. 75

               Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Dear Sir Qwark,
               
               Re-read your own post in reply to what I said and you see if it makes any sense, because when I read it, it doesn't.

               replyreport
            2. 75

               Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               If one is not conscious, then they are unconscious. One can only be either sleeping or dead. And irrational anything is impossible.
               
               The different levels of consciousness is what is left out of your statement, in the beginning, but injected into the secondary part of your post.
               
               And, just to let you know, irrational acts not only come from lower level of conscious thought, it also comes from reactionary emotions.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Cags:
                  Your comment: "And, just to let you know, irrational acts not only come from lower level of conscious thought, it also comes from reactionary emotions."
                  I agree Cags! But golly, at that moment of "irrationality," mightn't the 'conscious" one be functioning at a lower level of "consciousness (awareness)?" eh?
                  Just an aside to consider...:-)

                  replyreport
                  1. 75

                     Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Emotions are not tied to conscious thought. Emotions are reactionary/instinctive, based on cause and effect.
                     
                     A cause makes the effect of an emotion, regardless of thought.
                     
                     Irrationality is not subjected to simply the level of consciousness or awareness of one person. An irrational act is subjective based on an individual's ability to judge rational separate from irrational.
                     
                     You might see something as irrational, while the person who does the action has already rationalized it in their mind to be okay.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Cag:
                        Not so.
                        Emotions are definitely tied to "conscious" thought! My goodness!
                        I consciously witness a murder.
                        I understand the consequences and become emotionally involved. If I'm an "instinctive" animal as opposed to a conscious willful creature, I might pay it no attention and trot away.
                        As an "aware," intelligent animal, I am bound by, what is known in the field of biology as SOR. (Stimulous, Organism, Response).
                        My response to the murder may be "irrational"/emotional or it may be a studied and thoughtful response.
                        If I function at a high level of consciousness, my "response" may be thoughtful and logical: a 911 call.
                        An emotional response might be a scream, run away, cower in a corner in a fetal position and become "irrationally" emotional. That would be a lower level of "consciousness" response.
                        We humans are both "willfull" and "instinctive" creatures...but that which seperates us from lesser aware creatures is an ability to "willfully" control an instinctive response.
                        Oh yes, emotion is directly connected to "consciousness."   :-)

                        replyreport
      2. 60

         qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Cags:
         I went back to re-read your comment.
         I can't change my response.
         Irresponsible action is but the action of one who hasn't thought things out to a logical conclusion and acted before coming to a logical conclusion. Only the "conscious" can do that. Ergo, "consciousness" must be utilized to act irrationally.
         I stand by my response.
         If I responded "irrationally"..:-) Clear it up for me using a thoughtful conscious effort...ok..? TY...:-)

         replyreport
   2. 0

      Twenty One Daysposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      most definitely it is man's enemy and friend at the same time.
      his indulgence of it clearly shows an ever increasing necessity.
      
      by the same token, when man becomes able to exceed his need, he can exist beyond it, his conscious machine working while he is doing other things.

      replyreport
2. 61

   lxxyposted 12 years ago

   "I still think the odds are good that you can make a bet on what will be the odds, when numbers shape our world, and we control the shape, we'll frolic with the Gods."-Tub Ring
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 68

      mrpopoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Nice picture. Sad but true

      replyreport
      1. 61

         lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         If one is aware of how they feel about themselves and how they are living their life, they're free to change it.
         
         Then again, ignorance is bliss...

         replyreport
         1. 68

            mrpopoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Again, true.
            
            Although, I've always wondered how I could change things when I'm trapped in the system society imposes.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               As qwark points out there's millions of people on the planet--even in a fragmented system of governments you can slip through the cracks. Gone globally, even in an Orwellian fashion, it's even easier to play hide and seek in plain sight.
               
               Oh, and I'm working on my response qwark. In Hub Form. It's on.

               replyreport
               1. 68

                  mrpopoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  An interesting thought, but alas I still don't see how I could play hide and seek in plain sight.
                  
                  Could you explain, Ixxy? I'd love to know

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Oh, there's lots of ways. Look up Kevin Mitnick, for example. You might find him fascinating.

                     replyreport
                     1. 68

                        mrpopoposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        It's not what I had in mind, but that is interesting!

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I know. But it's really something you should look into, if being subversive is your gig. ;P
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           By the way, qwark. Here's your answer.

                           replyreport
               2. 60

                  qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  ok Ixxy...:-)

                  replyreport
   2. 60

      qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Thoughtlessly optimistic to the extreme.
      World population approximates 6.7 billion of us human creatures.
      In a generation and a half, it will reach 9 - 10 billion.
      Human consciousness has the ability to conquer most any jeopardizing threat...if it works together in concert.
      To think that mankind will come together to function "synergistically" with survival in mind, is pure poppycock. That probabilty does not exist.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Well someone's being a negative nancy.
         
         I'd love to debate it with you...but poppycock it isn't. All options are on the table until we open the box and find the cat dead or alive.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Hahaha  Ixxy, if you think poppycock it isn't, pls tell us why you think that. Can you?

            replyreport
3. 64

   goldenpathposted 12 years ago

   Man's natural enemy is excess flatulence!

   replyreport
4. 82

   LeanManposted 12 years ago

   I thought Man's natural enemy was woman....

   replyreport
5. 86

   rebekahELLEposted 12 years ago

   only to the degree that many are not aware of their own connection to consciousness, then they become their own natural enemy.
   the proverbial, 'follow the yellow brick road.' always looking, never realizing where it lies.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      lxxyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That reminds me of Mitch Hedberg...
      
      "I got tired of following my dreams so I asked where they were going and I told them I'd meet up with them later."

      replyreport
6. 68

   mega1posted 12 years ago

   There's consciousness and then there's awareness - we need to hurry up and train our consciousness so that we become more aware and less "self-conscious" - so we train our awareness outward and absorb the world around us with "conscious compassionate awareness" and then we can truly live by the Golden Rule - treating the world with true carefulness - otherwise we are just lost in a morass of self-gratification and destructiveness.
   
   But I do believe we are evolving towards conscious compassionate awareness - I hope we can hurry it along a little before we completely destroy the planet.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Mega:
      Man cannot destroy the planet.
      what do you think it is that will bring man together in concert to guarantee his success as an evolving form of life.
      Humanity is currently so fragmented by so many differing elements created by universal ignorance and depravity, that it seems to me that a burgeoning human population will only serve to degrade already terrible circumstances.

      replyreport
      1. 68

         mega1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I have no idea what you are trying to say!

         replyreport
         1. 60

            qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Mega:
            What is difficult for you to understand about my comment?
            Break it down for me.
            I'll try to clarify it for you...ok?

            replyreport
7. 60

   tel37posted 12 years ago

   Is that you Dave King ?Often think about you ,I lost you cntct details,Let me know,Terry

   replyreport
8. 68

   mega1posted 12 years ago

   Qwark - first you say man cannot destroy the planet, then you say overpopulation is degrading the planet - I guess that's what' I don't understand.  Also you ask me what I think will bring man together to evolve and survive -  I was saying that we need to hurry up and develop our "conscious compassionate awareness"  which is the intelligence we already have combined with compassion for each other and all life forms that will focus us on sustainably living on this planet - not destruction or war with each other.   I don't know whether we can survive or not - I don't know whether we will evolve enough and fast enough to accomplish this - but it starts with each individuals' awareness - there is no easy way - certainly we can't depend on our "faith" in some greater power to take care of us!

   replyreport
   1. 60

      qwarkposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      hahaha...Mega, Mega:
      I didn't say any of that except that man cannot destroy the planet...which is a FACT!
      I didn't say degrade the planet, which we can do, I said that "humanity' wil be further degraded by a burgeoning growth in human population.
      You are right about evolving "conscious compassionate awareness."
      You say we have to "hurry up." How do we hurry it up?
      You say "...it starts with each individuals' awareness...." I agree but if we can't do that now, with 6.7 billion people, what's it going to be like with about double that amount of ignorant, starving, angry, people who will be existing in horribly degrading, deprivating conditions?
      There is no "greater power" looking over us!
      We are the "captains of our ship, the masters of our faith!"
      Our "survival" as a species will not end, but I'm sure that there will be a massive diminution of our species in the not too distant future.
      Does that clear the intent of my comment up for you?   :-)

      replyreport
9. 0

   Chasukposted 12 years ago

   Consciousness is an evolved behavior that apparently increased our
   fitness to survive, so I don't see it as our enemy.

   replyreport