The relationship between awareness and existence...
  • jajsfaye
    26
    Is it possible that awareness and existence are inter-related, and are either the same thing or require each other in order to be what they are?

    Let me present my arguments and then you can destroy them, leaving me quivering in psychological trauma.

    First, let's agree on what "awareness" and "existence" mean in this context, since there can be disagreement.

    "awareness" is a property of consciousness, or sentience, that allows to experience an experience. We will leave feelings, thoughts, and knowledge (beyond the knowing of an experience, if that is knowledge) as optional accessories that are out of this definition.

    "existence" is harder to put in words, although it seems simple to conceive. I will just give some examples. The moon exists. Abstractions such as the integer between 2 and 4 do not exist. The bright purple unicorn standing next to you does not exist. (Unless there really is a bright purple unicorn standing next to you, in which case you will need to use a different example.)

    Now, consider four things:

    Thing A is something that exists. Also, there is at least one other thing that exists, Thing B, which has awareness of which its experience is influenced both by itself and by Thing A.

    Thing C is something that does not exist. If we scoured the entire universe across all of time, we would find no evidence that Thing C ever existed or will ever exist. Also, there are no things which have awareness that have have experiences which have ever been influenced by Thing C.

    Thing D is just like Thing A except for one thing. Nothing with awareness has ever been and never will have an experience that is influenced, directly or indirectly, by Thing D.

    Does Thing D exist?

    It seems to me that Thing D has exactly the same properties of non-existent Thing C so there is a good argument that it is also non-existent. If we accept this, then existence is relative to the awareness of something because another thing with awareness might have experiences influenced by different things. It also seems to me that we could define awareness as a mechanism to manifest existence, since it does not appear that this awareness is doing anything other than manifesting existence.

    What are your thoughts on this?
    jajsfaye Options
  • BrianW
    999
    Firstly, I love this discussion!

    I've been struggling with these two principles and haven't found a relationship that explains them without holes or errors. Presently, I define existence as 'that which is', 'a something', 'that which is undeniable', 'fact', etc. I consider it synonymous with LIFE.

    Awareness is the mechanism of 'Consciousness' which represents 'others' to you. Here we refer to other 'Consciousnesses' vs your own. This is also the territory of 'relative' phenomena or relationships. Awareness is usually accompanied by 'Response' whether internal/external or subjective/objective.

    Before I proceed I must define 'Consciousness' => "Consciousness is a manifestation or expression of LIFE." It is the subjective to LIFE'S objectivity.
    (Here, I get a bit lost myself and must explain it to myself to fully understand what I'm getting at. So, 'Consciousness' is like a light which LIFE uses to illuminate. It can even shine that light on Itself. 'Consciousness' is also like a language which LIFE uses to express Itself by. As well, it can express Itself to Itself.)

    I don't believe in non-existence. LIFE is an affirmation not a denial. If something does not exist, then, how do we know about it?

    The 'pink elephant' paradox: => This I use to show that even the contents of our thoughts and emotions are part of existence. Whether I tell you to think or not to think of a 'pink elephant', the mind must create an image of it before it can enact any conditioning. Therefore, to not think of a 'pink elephant' means to erase the picture of a 'pink elephant' from the mind. Which suggests that the picture already had a brief spell of existence there.
    To say something is non-existent is to imply an existence which has been named as 'non-existence'. It is just a name and does not deny existence. Remember the definition of existence, "that which is undeniable."
    BrianW Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.

Sign In Create Account

Categories