The Force and Consciousness

Moderators: Desolous

The Force and Consciousness 05 Sep 2013 17:11 #117398

If your question is, "Does the Force have consciousness?" I would interpret that as, "Is there consciousness within the Force?" to which I would reply that the answer is quite obviously yes. I am a part of the Force and I have consciousness so therefore the Force has consciousness.

If the question intended however was, "Is the Force a consciousness?" I might hesitate to answer. The Force in my belief is not a single consciousness, it is however a collective consciousness. There are billions of consciousnesses all coming together and there are forms of consciousness we cannot explain. I feel that there is no simple answer to this question as posed because consciousness is not an exact science, and mayhaps it never will be. It all comes down to belief and in the end neither side can "win" in the consciousness vs. non-consciousness debate because there is not definitive proof.

So, does the Force have consciousness or does it not?
I must agree with Proteus in saying both and neither.

It is similar to the study of light.
When you test light to see if it acts as a particle, it does.
However when you test light to see if it acts like a wave, it also does.
Is light a particle or a wave?
It is simultaneously both and neither.

It is important to remember that what is observed corresponds directly to how it is being observed.

May the Force be with you,
Rai
"No one entertains the thought that maybe God does not believe in you"
~Bo Burnham

Apprentice under Training Master Senior Knight Ryujin
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jestor, Wescli Wardest, Proteus, Lykeios

The Force and Consciousness 05 Sep 2013 19:18 #117415

  • Rickie
  • Rickie's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Member
  • ID: 12235
JohnsonMD wrote:
Let me pose the following question for discussion:

Does the Force have Consciousness?

For the purposes of this discussion, let us assume:
  • Consciousness is defined as: the quality or state of being aware of an external object or something within oneself; Sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind.

If possible, please provide some foundation to your answer - so as to help define what that may be (or not be) and provide insight for those also seeking such knowledge.

Nope The force is a sum but not the whole. Made up of all living forces but is not life or a life as defined above. If it were it would be beyond us anyway and beyond our ability to understand it but that doesn't mean we can know of it.

Don't over/deep think or try too hard to define this stuff this stuff. Just live it. :)

Does a small child deep think or define how to walk? Nope, it just gets up and learns how to walk. :)

Good question though.
I used to call myself Rickie The Grey but that was silly so I wish to be called just plain old "Rickie"

The Force and Consciousness 05 Sep 2013 22:06 #117424

Thanks for the responses everyone!

Some of the thoughts provided I can find common ground with, some of them I cannot.

However, said discussion has brought up topics and other aspects that didn't cross my mind prior, or served to either support or deny what I had already thought.

In the end...I have found this productive and worthwhile.

Thanks!
"There are attempts, and there are accomplishments. Histories only praise one."
The following user(s) said Thank You: Raikoutenshi
Last Edit: 05 Sep 2013 22:06 by JohnsonMD.

The Force and Consciousness 14 Sep 2013 06:39 #118261

JohnsonMD wrote:
sidvkili wrote:
JohnsonMD wrote:
Can you expand on the why/how of that Alexandre?

does everything need deep thought?

I could just respond to that by stating, "yes," but wouldn't be helpful now would it. ;)

Everything needs deep thought so that it can be understood, especially those things which are not self evident. The alternative is to know blindly, which imo is folly.

For example; the boots that I just put on my feet and laced up. They at one point required deep thought(s) so that I could come to understand that:
- They protect my feet,
- they are made out of this and that material,
- they are not water-proof! :(
- they are within the regulations (Army)

etc, etc

That level of thinking isn't too complicated, but it does require that I think about it further than just putting something on my feet and calling it a boot.

Things such as the Force, or God, or dogmatic approaches to life and the great mysteries therein require deep thought. Now, maybe that deep thought is not so deep for other people - however, it is necessary for me to have this understanding. Thus, if I ask for clarification, it is so that I can think more deeply upon what is said to me and thusly apply it to my line of thinking. Answers like, "yes" etc, are not helpful in that cause and only serve to complicate an already complicated issue (regardless of the ease at which the one who states such finds the issue complicated for them or not).

Hope that helps to explain where I am coming from.

yeah, it proves my point.
everything doesn't need deep thought. You need or want deep thought.

I stole my friends lunch a few days ago. Why? because I was hungry and I wanted what he had. Did you understand why I did it? Did it have deep thought?


Nope
I like the stars.

The Force and Consciousness 14 Sep 2013 11:17 #118270

A hypothetical scenario:

Premise 1: I define the Force as an existing, transcendental, conscious, eternal, interactive being. A being that fits not this description is not the Force.
Premise 2: The being we talk about is the Force.
Conclusion: Therefore, the being has consciousness i.e. the Force has consciousness.

This is a form of the ontological argument for the existence of God - by defining an entity in a certain way it becomes impossible for any entity under the same label in the course of the given discussion to be anything else. That way you can prove any property the entity might have like consciousness or existence: If it had not the property, the label would no longer fit.

Now the flaw is, of course, that it can prove everything and therefore is useless in proving anything.
You define the Force as something conscious (or not), and it is conscious (or not) so long as it is the Force.
You define it as existing and it exists so long as it is the Force (or not).
You define it as both invisible and pink and so it becomes. You can see where I'm going here.

Since we haven't observed an entity that we agreed to call the Force, our only way to speak of its properties is in defining it as whatever each of us wants it to be. That's a fun exercise but utterly useless in the end for its only potential is to create disagreements which can not be resolved - while it helps us no bit in learning anything about the Force.
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit. - Stephen W. Hawking

The Force and Consciousness 14 Sep 2013 13:08 #118275

  • Alan
  • Alan's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Knight
  • ID: 10670
A discussion regarding definitions is a helpful beginning to understanding, especially for us as we seek wisdom about the nature of the Force.

Some forms of consciousness are highly cognitive while others are less so, and still other forms (meditation, for example) lack that aspect of consciousness that we might call thinking (that is, thinking as an inner dialogue of words and images about some particular idea or object, cognition as problem-solving, and the like). It has been helpful for me to blur the distinctions that traditionally separate feeling and thinking. Think with the body. Eventually, as Alexander suggests, the cognitive activity of thinking about the Force fades as one lives it.
“The art of being wise is the art of knowing what to overlook.” William James
The following user(s) said Thank You: Alexandre Orion

The Force and Consciousness 14 Sep 2013 14:05 #118280

  • Streen
  • Streen's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Member
  • ID: 2215
JohnsonMD wrote:
Does the Force have Consciousness?

Well, the way I see it, we have consciousness, and we are one with the Force, so by extension the Force has consciousness.
There is a fine line between insight and insanity.

The Force and Consciousness 14 Sep 2013 14:48 #118290

Alan wrote:
A discussion regarding definitions is a helpful beginning to understanding, especially for us as we seek wisdom about the nature of the Force.
Bull. If one wishes to learn something about a topic, one better starts studying it and not making things up. Interestingly, if the subject is something real, the observations usually can be confirmed intersubjectively. Now, reality, of course, is in some areas a rather blurry term, but let's not go down that track just yet. Saying that defining a thing helps you understand it, is an admission that the thing in question is not real. Conversely, if it is real, whatever time we spend defining its properties on our own rather than observing them on the object, will be wasted.

Either way, the Force was never too clearly defined here so what the OP ends up with after this thread, is being alone left to make his own opinion on the subject - something he might as well have gotten without this thread altogether.

Also, noone is doing the entirety of the Jedi community any service by defining the Force in his own way. Its not that there haven't been way too well defined gods before and have we not seen enough of where that usually leads? And yet, leaving it undefined leaves the question unanswered... Tough dilemma, isn't it? :D

However, I also realize that this question is more about opinions and less asking for a definite answer, so I should take this a bit easier, I suppose... :blush:
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit. - Stephen W. Hawking
Latest Posts Comments Sermons
    • Deeper meaning (Last post by MartaLina)
    • Quote: Quote: To present Myth as Fact sounds like a contradiction in terms to me ? So no , the philosophy of SW is not lessened because its fiction. I assume most Myths to be Fiction. Including all books of religion. When does myth become myth? Can it begin as such? Or does it at some point cross from belief? It does not necessarily come from belief imo. And although some myths can be accounts of actual events, they have become transformed by symbolic meaning or shifted in time or place, played out , ending up as Myths , it can even be facts turned into Myths , its a lot harder to turn Myths into facts again though , hm good questions thank you :)
    • Our Chemical Romance (Last post by V-Tog)
    • Quote: Another problem is that it is not now possible to measure serotonin and norepinephrine in the brains of patients. Estimates of brain neurotransmitters can only be inferred by measuring the biogenic amine breakdown products (metabolites) in the urine and cerebrospinal fluid. The assumption underlying this measurement is that the level of biogenic amine metabolites in the urine and cerebrospinal fluid reflects the amount of neurotransmitters in the brain. However, less than one-half of the serotonin and norepinephrine metabolites in the urine or cerebrospinal fluid come from the brain. The other half come from various organs in the body. Thus, there are serious problems with what is actually being measured. The author of the article seems to have neglected to emphasize that this works both ways. :pinch: All the articles I have ever read on both sides of the debate, including this one, read a little to me like 'The Field'... I don't have a strong view either way - I'm aware that, for instance, if genetic predisposition towards depression does exist, I probably have that predisposition - but I know that there's no conclusive evidence either way. Thus, it's a consideration, and at this point, I believe that's all it should be for anybody (but it absolutely should still be a consideration)... Take anti-depressants if you feel so inclined, but take them in the awareness that no-one really knows for sure whether they work or not. If you feel worse (or no different), stop taking them. If you feel better, I see that as a good thing regardless of whether it is due to medicine or the placebo effect... Yes, if it's just the placebo effect (remembering that as far as we know, it may not be), people would still need to address whatever is really going on, but maybe some will be in a better state of mind to do that once they have already started to see a sign that there may actually be some light at the end of the tunnel? What we have to be careful of is accusing people of being the architects of states of mind that, to them, have arisen out of nowhere. And/or accusing them of not doing enough to try to dispel states of mind that they feel they have chucked the kitchen sink at. In these instances it can be pretty unhelpful to sound too much as though one is saying "it's entirely your fault that you are feeling this way". Either way, one day, when sciencey people eventually get this properly figured out, one camp is going to feel pretty sheepish about having been telling people to do the exact opposite of what they need to do for so long. But we have no real idea which way that is going to go...
    • From time to time a poem (Last post by Seiten Taisei)
    • Maddening moments mediated my mind among arias arranged, autonomous. Details dotted dancers, developing delightful distractions. Intravenous imagery instantaneously ingested. Most minute meanders might invoke irritation instead. galleries of gallows gain hesitating hounds. High handed templars think to tie the thread. But, being bested by babbling brooks emerge enigmatic epiphany! egress! Much might might mess aptly add, adding alphabetically. Do decide deciphering, dont depreciate decrees! Hehehehehe :)
    • Should jedi stay out of politcal office (Last post by MartaLina)
    • I am in politics aswell , nobody pays me yet and thats great , nobody has me in his pocket and nobody ever will , i realise that when i get one a Parties paylist thing maybe would change , but i really hope it does not ...
    • Leaders Eat Last (Leadership in Jediism) (Last post by JamesSand)
    • Quote: What the differences and responsibilities of a leader, a manager, and a peer? Leadership is a Quality. Manager and Peer are roles. I have Managers, Peers, and Pawns (I'm sure there's a better word, but I can't for the life of me remember what the seminar told me to call them) who I consider Leaders. I have Managers, Peers, and Pawns I consider Deadbeats. Oftentimes I find leadership in people who "work for me", as a quality of their character, not because of some god-given right, comparison of salary, or level of qualification. Plenty of people are "The Alpha" in a team, without necessarily being "The Boss/Manager" (I have a Peer who has this privilege - The Boss will make a Decision, but until the Alpha consents, no one acts on it)
    • Rants far and wide (Last post by Avalonslight)
    • When you hit that point of saying "f**k it, I quit" and then actually do so cause what the hell does it matter. You're the only one who cares anymore anyway....
    • Cultural Sensitivity/Appropriation and Anger (Last post by Parnerium)
    • Quote: but we reduce thing to their irreducible elements (or the closest approximation we are able) for a reason What is that reason? That's a serious question, not a rhetorical one. I don't think that's a useful practice, for the reasons I explained with the execution of gays example. Cultural appropriation in my view isn't about reducing any acts down to cultural appropriation. It's about analyzing the causes and methods of harm. Yes, throwing people off of buildings is wrong because that is murder. But actually stopping that harm (murder) from occurring requires us to think more broadly than "murder is wrong." We might, instead, need to address other things. As an example, say we're looking at the practice of "separate but equal" in the Southern US. We can say "lynching is wrong because it is murder." But to use that as a justification for why we shouldn't talk about all of elements of race relations that make lynching possible and make it seem acceptable among the citizens would be a mistake. That's part of why civil rights movements didn't start with black people standing around saying "lynching is wrong." They addressed the other aspects of life (separate facilities) that increased the divide between blacks and whites that, in turn, made lynching so common. My interest in cultural appropriation is not to say, "It is wrong, end of story." I think that approach is what you're arguing against when you say things like "its useful to understand the justifications behind various murders, but the wrongness of the act can be reduced to the act itself." That's not my position at all. It is to say that the practice of cultural appropriation can be what creates other harms. Yes, those other harms are the bad part. But where cultural appropriation is helping to cause that harm, I think it needs to be addressed. Just because it is not the "irreducible element" doesn't mean it isn't a worthwhile concept. And it doesn't mean that looking critically at forms of cultural appropriation that contribute to harm is useless in favor of just focusing on the harm. Even you said yourself it's useful to understand the things behind murders. We can say that living in poverty causes harm. But if we stop there and never look at what sorts of things contribute to poverty, then we'll never be able to actually stop the harm caused by poverty. Sure, the most basic element of the suffering might be poverty. But there's more to it. And I think it is worthwhile to talk about that "more." I think funding schools based on property taxes is a problem. Not because the concept of locally funding schools is bad. But because poverty is bad. And those practices help to keep poverty alive. In this case, the wrongness of the act is not the act itself. But that doesn't somehow make it not a problem. Reducing the discussion down to poverty isn't useful. Quote: it is likely that all our hypothetical con-persons also eat bread, but we cannot connect the actual harm experienced by actual victims to the ingestion of bread by the perpetrators But we can connect the cultural legacy/reputation of certain practices to how much people buy into the con job. That's why somebody would use the word "Wushu" and not the word "Bread." Because one is actually relevant to the situation and one is not. Quote: is it really worse for a con to pretend to be a monk than to pretend to be an inventor? i mean if a fake monk convinces you to donate to 5 dollars to his fake temple and a fake inventor convinces you to invest your life savings on the prototype to his perpetual motion energy generator, what criteria stand out as being the MOST important factors for deciding the nature and magnitude of the harm? Extracurricular activities are less important than grades when it comes to getting accepted to a college in the US. Does this mean that extracurricular activities are irrelevant because they are not the MOST important factor when deciding the outcome of the application? Is it worse for a con to pretend to be a monk than to pretend to be an inventor? No. Does that mean that the two are entirely identical just because one isn't better or worse than the other? No. Things can be different without falling into some sort of hierarchy.
    • Think... (Last post by Jack.Troutman)
    • Day 13 Preventing a Fall Honor and shame are the same as fear. Fortune and disaster Are the same for all. What is said of honor and shame is this: Whether absent or present, They are inseparable from the fear That they give rise to. What is said of fortune and disaster is this: They can befall any person. By the accident of good fortune One may rule the world for a time. But by virtue of love One lives forever. From the Tao Te Ching
    • The transfer of ICANN (Last post by MadHatter)
    • Cayce if that is indeed the case and they have no ability to deal with particular site names then my fears were indeed over bloated. Networking is not something I will make any claim to have a grasp of so I will trust this to be accurate. Thank you for the explanation. I still am mistrustful of a UN like group as I distrust the UN but it appears like the UN this group would be largely powerless to do real damage. So it looks like I jumped the gun on this one as the understanding I was given via an Irish youtuber made it seem much riskier than I thought.
    • To vote, or not to vote... (Last post by Lykeios)
    • Every election I'm torn between voting and not voting. I don't know that my vote matters but I don't know that it doesn't matter. Also, as an anarchist I think participating in the system is pretty much a denial of my true feelings about government. I only vote because I have to put up with government and I want some say in how things are run. I think the two party system is bullshit and needs to change. Choosing between two people for president is ridiculous, we should have more options. I don't know if I'll be voting this year. I'll have just moved to a new state and won't have time to register to vote before the election. So if I want to vote I'll have to vote absentee or sign up for early voting. Also, as I said, I don't like the idea of participating in the system I don't believe in. We'll see what I decide to do. Either way one of two people will be elected president.
    • New york area Temples (Last post by Cabur Senaar)
    • I'm delighted you asked! Not a Temple, as such, but whenever two or more of us are gathered, as they say. TotJo's NY Group Our next meeting! Jedi: Empire State invites TotJO: New York, and anyone wiling to make the trip, to meet up in the Hudson Valley. Go to the November Meeting Event Page for more details!
    • Who is God to you? (Last post by JamesSand)
    • Quote: The question was asked, so I warn you in advance, here is my answer; 'God' is a fictional supernatural being in the number one bestseller 'the Bible' written by some desert dwelling scribes in the Arabian sand dunes. A fair assessment. I'll keep it in mind next time I'm reading a "What is Jediism to you" Thread :laugh: B) :whistle:

There are 213 visitors, 5 guests and 25 members online (none in chat): Akkarin, Jestor, Desolous, Proteus, V-Tog, Alexandre Orion, Rosalyn J, Llama Su, rrhodes67, Kit, Avalonslight, carlos.martinez3, Hyrum Tigerprice, Jack.Troutman, MadHatter, MartaLina, Gwinn, Draxuxus, Kyrin Wyldstar, JamesSand, Jamie Kay, x57z12, Jaxz, Parnerium, tanco135, Martial, KristiaRen, Ardainyo.

Follow Us