The Birth of Consciousness

[Neshamah]

Ok, I have a puzzle for everyone. I hope you find it as intriguing as I do... ;)

At what point in human evolution did consciousness begin ? Did it start with one homonid and then he / she taught the rest (how do you teach consciousness ?). Did it happen all at once to a tribe, like an illness that they all contracted, and then spread to others ?

Any of you who have had children (I have two adult children) have witnessed the not-so-slow development and birth of consciousness in a toddler. It is so exciting when little Jr. suddenly begins to include himself / herself into the family dynamic; or in other words, begins to narratize about himself / herself. This narratization IS (in my view) the very beginning of consciousness.

When did this happen for the human species ? How long ago ? When did we begin putting OURSELVES into the story of the tribe ? In other words, when did it suddenly become "HIS-story" ?

Enjoy !!!

Neshamah

[MatthewK]

I think Julian Jaynes overcomplicated his answer to this question; for the most part I agree with a gradual shift over time of our faculties that arose out of an inherent need to survive and progress as a species, but at what point did it stop being natural? It's like when they tell you that you'll be enlightened when you can stop thinking of the purple elephants.

[m1thr0s]

I guess the stumbling block I am experiencing with this is a working definition of consciousness I can feel resolved with...

just to get a glimpse of what an arduous task this can be, maybe start with a Wiki definition - knowing perfectly well that this can't even begin to resolve anything.
But it illustrates the point I think: Consciousness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness) (Wiki Link)

When asking the question: at what point in Human evolution did consciousness begin? We seem to also be unavoidably asking at what point in all of evolution did it begin, since, among other things, it is not satisfactorily resolved that atoms themselves are not possessed of some kind of consciousness...not human of course because we tend to confuse consciousness with cognition and/or perception, which we then tend to measure by our own human yardstick alone.

Are animals not conscious? Insects? Fish? Plants? Fungi? And what of greater bodies such as entire planets, moons, stars and so on? I am not comfortable with the assumption that the universe itself is somehow not conscious until Man comes along to render it so...

So I'd like to sort out how to approach this one but it's not so easy as it might seem to some.

m1thr0s

[Neshamah]

m1thr0s, I'll bet your teachers at school got very frustrated with you. :3wacko: You ruined ALL my fun (i.e., going through all the various theories of "consciousness" before getting to the actual question!). Oh well, I'll just give my own definition (for the purposes of this exercise) and we'll play the game.

"Consciousness" for this particular exercise means, "awareness of awareness." I believe that dogs and monkeys and lions are "aware." The real question is are they "aware" that they are "aware"? I believe that only human beings (and perhaps some sea mammals) qualify for this level (or type) of "consciousness" (on this planet). I believe it is this "awareness of awareness" that separates us from the other animals. :p

So, when did human beings become "aware" that they were "aware"? At what point in our history did people suddenly realize that they were "aware" of their "awareness"? Is this a recent phenomenon ? Please explain the reasons for your answer.

Light, Life, and Love.

Neshamah

[m1thr0s]

m1thr0s, I'll bet your teachers at school got very frustrated with you. :3wacko: You ruined ALL my fun (i.e., going through all the various theories of "consciousness" before getting to the actual question!).yeah...it was sort of a rock vs hard place situation for me though since I didn't want to not respond at all but was having a really tough time finding the right angle...

so I just addressed that quandary...

thanks for putting forward your own definition...that will help.

just off the top of my head, I feel like this links to the process of recording knowledge and experience through drawing or writing or even story telling...which of itself has been linked to the discovery of fire. That was a critical turning point for humankind that allowed us to make more productive use of night and set us on a path of self-reflection that has never stopped evolving...

m1

[MythMath]

That, and the constant, critical viewing of the original 'big-screen'...

THE NIGHT SKY...

Tele/Vision, indeed... ;)

[Neshamah]

just off the top of my head, I feel like this links to the process of recording knowledge and experience through drawing or writing or even story telling...which of itself has been linked to the discovery of fire. That was a critical turning point for humankind that allowed us to make more productive use of night and set us on a path of self-reflection that has never stopped evolving...



I do believe that the discovery of fire was essential for humankind's continued development. However, it is my opinion that it was the Invention of Writing (3500 BCE) that led to our "awareness of our awareness" (i.e. "conscisousness"). Or, more specifically, it was Reading what we had Written. Because, it was our ability to "narratize," to tell our story to ourselves in our own minds (by reading), that led to "awareness of awareness."

Of course, our first written information consisted mainly of economic and administrative facts (i.e. "King Mustafa has 53 cows, 28 sheep, and 9 pigs. I, the scribe of King Mustafa, have recorded this"). But, it didn't take too long for scribes to begin writing about other things: funerary rites, coronations of Kings, wills, et.al. It did take almost 1000 years after the invention of writing (during the Early Dynastic Period in Mesopotamia, i.e. 2900 - 2500 BCE) for the scribes to begin recording Oral Traditions of gods and goddesses. Alongside this came the first "histories," as the Epic of Gilgamesh was recorded about 2000 BCE. Those who could read this account of Gilgamesh's trials and triumphs against all manner of enemies would place themselves in the story as Gilgamesh. In doing so, they began to narratize, or see themselves as a part of their OWN story. With this internal dialogue, internal narration, "awareness of awareness" came about. Therefore, it might be said that "consciousness" began in Mesopotamia, sometime between 3000 to 2000 BCE.

Of course, this is only a theory (MY theory :dull: ), and there are many others (such as, Julian Jaynes, Thomas Nagel, Ned Block, even St. Thomas Aquinas). For those interested in an overview of "Consciousness Theory," take a look at Wikipedia's article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness

For more information on Mesopotamia and the Invention of Writing, see this site maintained by the University of Chicago:

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/ED/TRC/MESO/archaeology.html

Light, Life, and Love.

For a Peace Profound,

Neshamah

[m1thr0s]

hmmm...you may be overlooking oral traditions though and I have no idea how far back we would trace that one. I am also suspicious that advanced architecture seems to precede writing as well as many forms of culture such as medicine and horticulture and agriculture and textiles, crafts of all kinds, metalurgy, weaponry and tool development on all levels. All these things require the ability to assimilate previous knowledge and build upon it with a very high degree of sophistication. It doesn't seem possible that we could do this without the ability to scrutinize ourselves..to take inventory and know that we are doing so.

But I'm not debating this just to be a jerk...I think it's an important question and may impact how much we are willing to assimilate of the human experience in our day-to-day processes. If we tend to think of human beings before the advent of writing as less conscious than ourselves, then I think we tend to dismiss the wisdom embedded in those times as well. I think this could amount to a great miss if we plot it incorrectly.

Finally, what I know of the development of writing is that it actually begins long before the establishing of formal alphabets usually designed around simple writing utensils. Writing begins with pictures and most ancient languages have their pictographic lineages stretching back long before the formalization of what is really a more modern invention, ie, common alphabets. But just how far back can we trace these pictographic systems? It is possible that we have to go all the way to the earliest known cave drawings for instance, many of which are strikingly uniform in content, suggesting that a picture of a horse (for instance) may have also been used to convey a word for *horse* alongside an entire body of knowledge about horses and their relevance to human culture... if pictures are intended to convey a story (which I think they are), then our timeline just went ballistic...

This being the case...*writing* goes back nearly as far as the use of fire...possibly even further.

edit: a quick example from my end is to be found in the hexagrams of the I Ching which we now have archeological evidence stretching back well before the time of Fu Hsi, the first actual Chinese emperor. Scholars have known for a long time that these images came down long before any compiled texts did and that the Chinese Sages of these periods were principally an oral tradition, relying upon a very few symbols to convey a great deal of information. I would tend to think the same would hold true for Runes and/or other well developed geomantic scripts...

These *oracles* are extremely old and can be found on all continents, with the possible exception of the poles for obvious reasons. Their whole purpose serves this business of *awareness of awareness* I think.

m1

[Neshamah]

In order to respond to this in depth I'll have to get into the theories of Julian Jaynes; and that might take me a day or so to pare it down to fit into this format. So, give me a day and I'll try to explain how humanity was quite able to have cities and farms without possessing a "consciousness" as we think of that term today -- there was no "awareness of awareness" until the separation of the two hemispheres of the brain.

Again, I'll post on this in full tomorrow.

Peace Profound to all,

Neshamah

[m1thr0s]

that sounds good Neshama. I am at least vaguely aware of his work though I have not read The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind personally. I don't think I can agree with his definition of consciousness thus far but I'm definitely willing to review it better.

One interesting thing that emerges in this is the idea that the switching over from God as an externalized to an internalized *singularity* (borrowing the term from astrophysics) would, by his apparent definitions, be the hallmark of a true consciousness...and that is an intriguing notion. So I really am willing to give this one a fair hearing. There are other factors that might account for this shift however...his is hardly the only theory addressing this, though the dates seem to vary quite dramatically depending on ones angle of approach.

m1

[Neshamah]

Haven't forgotten about this -- just a little pressed for time. :tworried:

I'm almost finished with my brief "overview" of Jaynes' theory of the Bicameral Mind and its Breakdown as the genesis of Consciousness (as we understand it today). Another day or so ought to do it. Please forgive my tardiness... :truce:

Peace.

Neshamah

[Neshamah]

If we tend to think of human beings before the advent of writing as less conscious than ourselves, then I think we tend to dismiss the wisdom embedded in those times as well. I think this could amount to a great miss if we plot it incorrectly.

Reading back through this thread I came across this sentence (from m1thr0s) that I missed before. I just wanted to comment on it briefly.

I do not believe that human beings before the invention of writing (or, before the origin of consicousness) were any less than ourselves. In fact, quite the opposite is true. I beleive that WE are the ones who are somehow "less" because we rely so much on our ego-consciousness (a phrase I would like to use for now) that we are less able than our ancestors.

Today, in every bookstore in America, one can find books about meditation. What is the goal of this meditation? To quiet the mind in order to receive "insight;" or, perhaps just for relaxation, as our ego-conscious-driven mind tends to always be under stress.

Now that our minds are literally filled with thoughts of all kinds all day long, we search for ways to calm our weary, over-heated brains; some look to pharmaceuticals (valium, xanax), others try meditation or yoga, others just seek to annihilate it in drugs and alcohol. If this "new" consciousness is so much better than the "old," why are so many of us so stressed out?

Crowley uses a sports metaphor (a golf stroke) in Book 4, to discuss a type of consciousness that ISN'T thinking:


In fact, there are three main classes of stroke; the bad stroke, which we associate, and rightly, with wandering attention; the good stroke which we associate, and rightly, with fixed attention; and the perfect stroke, which we do not understand, but which is really caused by the habit of fixity of attention having become independent of the will, and thus enabled to act freely of its own accord.

Perhaps it is THIS consciousness, where our ego-consciousness has taken a "back seat," so to speak, and we are able to perform feats that astound us when we reflect on them later (sarcasm added), that our ancestors used to build the pyramids and formidable temples that dot our ancient landscape. If this is the case (as I beleive that it is) we have indeed lost something with the development of our ego-consciousness.

This type of consciousness isn't necessary for our survival (the great apes aren't too concerned about writing down their schedule for the day); it may even be a hindrance to our further survival, if we don't collectively "get a grip," and learn once again, to relax, and calm our minds. :o_O:

Just some thoughts unitl I get back with the real MEAT of this thread.

Light, Life, and Love.

Peace Profound for All,

Neshamah

[MatthewK]

This thread is making me want to go back and read the damn thing again :) The first time I read it I was riveted, I literally did everything in my power to stay awake and keep reading (caffiene is only the beginning), and each time thereafter I just got more and more focused on the specifics without appreciating the "big picture", so to speak. My question is why in the hell more people haven't read - or even heard of - this book! :doh:

---------------- Now playing: Bloodoline - Voyage till Death (http://www.foxytunes.com/artist/bloodoline/track/voyage+till+death) via FoxyTunes (http://www.foxytunes.com/signatunes/)

[homoveritas]

Thank you very much for introducing a thread about Consciousness. I find it a very fascinating subject and it's on my mind a lot at the moment.

I see on Wikipedia it says: "The exact definition of consciousness is still open to debate among academics."

Debate.
Academics.

These are not words I would associate with Consciousness!

I 'woke up' to become 'aware that I am aware' on a single night in January.

As soon as that happened I thought of the collective experience on earth, as opposed to just my own. Indeed, my own future immediately depended on everyone else. That's why I have become so interested in how the Individual Illusion (the world I create around me) works in conjunction with the Collective Illusion (the world we create for us all).

Do you know something? My mind has great difficulty in maintaining any sort of balance when I consider this very simple phrase:

"I exist."

You see, I now know I do exist, but that's a very big concept for little me. Before my awakening, I would have shown mild intellectual curiosity in this phrase, and nothing more (call me an academic!). Now, the truth of it seems so MASSIVE.

What does it mean to know that I exist?

It tells me that I am an eternal part of a whole, indeed a fragment of it. The whole is everything there is in this Universe (and any others that exist). I am but a fragment of the Universe and the Universe is Consciousness.

I AM the Universe. Yessssssss!

So I must be Consciousness, whether I realise it or not. And whether I realise it or not, it is driving me and it is driving all of us. When we are in tune with this Infinite Consciousness - which clearly manifests itself to a greater lesser degree depending on the person who is the vehicle for it - life takes on a new meaning. It is more alive, and the 'now' is what counts.

Sometimes I wake up in the morning and think: Here I am here again, in this place. Simply that. And I get the sensation that I could just as easily wake up in a different world. But no, I'm in this one and I must have chosen to come here (because from here I am not!). All that we do we do as a result of our own choice.

Each one of us comes here to fulfil a role. Now, if we can know what role we were incarnated here to play out, then we can understand how important it is.

I know that I am supposed to be passing on what I learn to others (Consciousness - which I am! - communicated that to me in an etheral dream). If I haven't worked out the best way to do it yet, no matter. The answer always comes. Incidentally, I write something on my blog each day - will my audience build? It will if I succeed in focusing my intent on that outcome!

I would like to say something about the development of Consciousness, which is very interesting to talk about it, isn't it!

I recently watched a 1922 documentary about an eskimo and his family. 'Nanook' was the eskimo's name.

I considered that all that Nanook did he did with his intuition. His life was about survival, day after day after day. There was little food, so it was imperative that he hunted effectively and efficiently. He was absolutely committed to every kill, as he had to be. He used his intuition to survive (and in surviving, to perpetuate the human race*).

Is Intuition the same as Consciousness? Hmmm. In a way perhaps, but it's not being 'aware that you are aware'. It's just 'being', with no need for thinking. So what's the use of thinking - why did the Creator hand us thoughts? To create with?

As far as the development of Consciousness on earth is concerned, Man has to create, because that's what Consciousness does in its process of self reflection (towards whatever the End of Creation is). Man is, after all, Consciousness.

At one stage Nanook was shown a gramaphone by The White Man. The white man was showcasing the brilliance of human creativity.

However much we may admire Nanook's natural abilities as a survivor, he was the victim of an extraordinarily harsh environment. The white man on the other hand lived in an environment which allowed for creativity beyond that which pertained to immediate necessity.

The development of Consciousness, it seems to me, is the development of Creativity.

* What are we Human Racing towards? How much more is there left to create, and when do we get to the bit about creating our way out of here?!

http://www.moma.org/images/collection/FullSizes/flaherty_Nanook_2.jpg