So when you sleep your self disappears? :s — Agustino
The last time I checked, murder means killing someone who actually, decidedly, and emphatically exists. — Bitter Crank
As a mind with no consciousness and sentience can't exist, we can reach a conclusion that a person who is asleep has no mind (at that moment, that is). — BlueBanana
This requires a very precise understanding of mind, since the mind does reawaken. There is continuity of some sort as memory is recalled and intention once again exerts will. — Rich
Having been unconscious, the actual feeling is that of no memory and no intent to perform some action — Rich
I believe this might be a poor phrasing of what you mean, as I assume you don't mean unconsciousness is (necessarily) followed by amnesia? — BlueBanana
It does appear to be what one might call "temporary amnesia", since observation of memory is not there. There can be disagreement if what is memory, but it doesn't appear to be there in an unconscious state. — Rich
Our brain does have the memories as electric signals, but does the mind, assuming it's not only a product of chemical interactions, have them? — BlueBanana
Thoughts — BlueBanana
"Consciousness" and "self-awareness" are features of mind of which we are especially fond, but they are not the only components of a person. — Bitter Crank
There is so much about us that is processed out of reach of the conscious mind. "I" am witnessing some of these words flow into the computer through my fingers. I am not consciously composing the sentences, for the most part. — Bitter Crank
Then too, our body is part of the unified self. We disposed of mind/body dualism, right. — Bitter Crank
the Aristotelian version is that the fetus has a "telos" (to mature into a baby in the same way an acorn matures into a tree), and that having an abortion permanently frustrates this telos. — darthbarracuda
Is it possible for the sub-consciousness, for example, exist without the conscious mind? — BlueBanana
the conscious I, in a sense, dissolves into the lower levels of this stratification in the mind’s agencies — javra
a conductor to the orchestra of the mind’s agencies — javra
I don't have the time to go more into detail concerning your response right now, my apologies, but might you know the aristotelian stance on whether keeping a rock on a table is morally wrong as it's perturbing the telos of that rock, which is reaching the ground? — BlueBanana
Another problem with free will (or not) is that the agent about whom we are talking is also the agent providing the evidence for free will, or not -- a clear conflict of interest. — Bitter Crank
I like your idea of consciousness 'dissolving into the lower levels' much more than Blue Banana's 'ceases to exist'. — Bitter Crank
We have (prima facie) duties to the dead not to desecrate their graves, steal their shit or slander their image, even if they're not around to know anything about it. We have duties not to kill people in their sleep - the fact that we can say we can "kill" them (even if they don't "exist" at the time of killing) means we recognize that there is, in fact, some sort of "residue" left behind that is morally relevant. Just because it's a memory or an idea doesn't make it any less "real". — darthbarracuda
All that said, I'm assuming a scientific position. — TheMadFool
I found my point of view on the metaphysics of a sleeping person's mind relevant and decided to contribute. As a mind with no consciousness and sentience can't exist, we can reach a conclusion that a person who is asleep has no mind (at that moment, that is). Of course, reaching into the topic that Victoribus Spolia started, we know that killing a person while they're asleep is a murder and morally wrong, which is because they're going to wake up, ie. they have potential to have a mind. But this is the argument Victoribus uses to justify opinion that most of us disagree on, that contraception is murder.
This is quite a dilemma I'm facing. One could ponder the relevance of the existence of physical body, but I find three counter examples to disprove this stance: first, braindead people are considered dead as they have neither mind nor potential to have one; second, dead bodies (similar to the former one except that the body isn't alive); and third, a hypothetical person with no body.
I believe the answer to be the existing social connections of a sleeping person, but this is slightly problematic as we wouldn't approve killing such a person. Alternatively a view on the metaphysics of soul that includes an afterlife might provide potential answers, as the sleeping person's mind (that didn't, at the moment, exist) would continue to the afterlife, but the soul of a person who never existed, would not. — BlueBanana
the fact is, killing a sleeping person is murder — TheMadFool
I guess we should be asking what anything being morally respectable is based on and whether it's justified to demand us to respect the dead to find the answer. — BlueBanana
i.e., we "die" when we go to bed but are "resurrected" when we wake u — darthbarracuda
There does appear to a mental 'reunion' of sorts for me upon waking, but that feels more Thomistic than Aristotelian. — JupiterJess
Why does the mind move through these different states? — Rich
I'm still unsure about the evolutionary advantage — JupiterJess
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.