Home Discussion Forum Is consciousness identical with the knowledge?

Is consciousness identical with the knowledge?

you know what I want to know
Is our consciousness identical with our knowledge?
Is OUR consciousness identical with OUR knowledge?
how do you know knowledge is being OUT THERE?

13 COMMENTS

  1. Hmm, I see you devote yourself to a lot of useless mental tinkering…Consciousness should be identical to knowledge, but then one has to define knowledge. So no, sometimes consciousness and knowledge are not identical. You can be knowledgeable but be completely unconscious of many things; And you can be very conscious of many things, but lack the intellectual knowledge…It’s endless….

  2. They are two different components of the mind. Being self aware and awake is something an infant can do. Knowledge is acquired over time.

  3. No. One may be conscious but still without knowledge. Knowledge is earned and not a right. Wisdom is using knowledge in the best way. Knowledge may be of different disciplines, but wisdom is always the same, the proper using of the knowledge.
    Consciousness is simply being aware, but may not require the recording of information which is knowledge.

  4. depends on how you understand or define the terms. for me, they are different. knowledge is more technical for me. more concrete. consciousness is not. consciousness is awareness of our surrounding but knowledge is technically naming or putting our sorroundings in order. wow. this question is kinda tough. its like trying to see the dissolved salt in water. get what i mean?

  5. No, they are different.
    We can know we are conscious. This is the mind reacting to consciousness. We can also be conscious that we know we are conscious. This means that consciousness is aware of the mind, knowing. Knowing is within the realm of the mind and body. But consciousness is separate. That is why it is able to stand apart from the mind and observe it ‘being’ smart’.

  6. Consciousness is with almost all living creatures right from the lowest order to the highest being the human being! Consciousness is more of biological coupled with genetic development forcing every creature to survive and to search for everything to know the ways and means of survival and in the process the fittest survives to continue the search with the knowledge acquired over the ages! So, the knowledge of everything is a pure science that exists in the material world outside of our consciousness! The consciousness is continuously updated by the continuous development on the knowledge of survival that ensuring the human to be more of consciousness on everything that is knowledgeable!

  7. mmm… now i got it all mixed up … let me try again…
    be careful, not to confuse “conscious” with “conscience” 🙁
    [EDIT:
    >>Is our consciousness identical with our knowledge?
    no?
    >>Is OUR consciousness identical with OUR knowledge?
    are you conscious about all you know all the time? I think not, otherwise our brains would explode. We have mechanisms in our brains, that only put that knowledge into our conscience, what we need right now – and that does not always work, e.g. if we forgot something (if you understand it like the “three-artists-theory” i’ll draft in a second, the answer would be yes.)
    >>how do you know knowledge is being OUT THERE?
    do you realize, what you just said?
    how do you *KNOW* … *KNOWLEDGE* … (is being out there) ?
    first realize this, before you ask about “out there”
    then you may want to rephrase the question…
    did you mean: “how can we verify, that the knowledge we have, is the same others have?”
    I think: “we can show that it is not!”
    (if you take three artists, and tell each one to paint a blue house with three windows, one door, a garden in front, a garage at the side and chidlren at the back, you will get three different pictures)
    or did you mean: “how can we be sure, that the picture of the world we have in our mind is actually how the world is?”
    I think: “we cannot! In fact we know it is not, because our senses are limited and our interpretation is biased by the experiences we’ve had so far. We cannot see ultra-violet light, or hear ultra-sound, …”

    Descartes is a great way to start:
    http://www.classicallibrary.org/descartes/principles/01.htm

    knowledge is, the information we have stored in our brains.
    all the stuff we ever sensed / read / heard / felt / thought and even dreamt.
    If you read a sentence: “blue is red”, then these words are stored in your mind and become “known” to you.
    If you touch someone and feel the warmth of his skin, then that sensation becomes “known” to you.
    You can dream while sleeping, can you not? Are you conscious in that state of mind? That’s a great question!
    I dreamt I was a butterfly. Now I’m awake and wonder: “Am I a butterfly dreaming to be a human?”
    So, “out there” is only appliccable if you are conscious, but i’d argue that you can *know* without consciencness.
    Can you be conscious without knowing? Like when you are so drunk, that you don’t know what you are doing? That seems to be the mainstream-idea?
    ]
    I confused myself … bad english … does it now make sense?

  8. There is a difference between these two thesis:
    i. Our conciousness has as a basic unity a propositional form of acting. (i.e. it presents to you things as “that object IS reddish and big, that other object HAS some other characteristic, and so on. Something evaluable as true or false)
    ii. Our consciousness is identical with all that we know.
    The first thesis is argued to be true for, as example, Kant. The second thesis is still too vague to be even understood.
    You can have like too exits:
    The first one is implying the thesis i, but trough the via of equalizing knowledge with the possibilities of our concept fulfilment. For example: imagine that you have just one concept, dog. You go to and through the world identifying what’s a dog and what’s not a dog. So, in a sense you can not possibly know anything else, but if for every object that is present to your senses it is a dog or not. And so, the concept you have, constitute anything you can have consciously displayed in front of you.
    The second way to make intelligible the thesis ii, does not imply the thesis i. You would be saying that conciousness is exactly what you know in a certain moment. But that would not explain for example, how does YOUR conciousness can present new stuff to you. For instance a new sunrise, or a a new person, because for every moment that you’d be in front of a new stimulus, you’d knew something new, and there you’d have a new conciousness, and a you also would be a new person and so on.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related