Unfinished Business

Posted on July 22, 2010

2


While we may experience our demise, without its memory we will be forever bereft of comprehending it.

I’m not intentionally trying to be overly morbid, but Brian Clements in his blog has got me thinking about certain issues — namely, consciousness (and how we experience it, use language to describe it and what occurs within it). Naturally, when thinking of consciousness you have to consider the point where it ends (individually or collectively).

I have no definitive answers at the moment, but one question I’m posing is: Can we (the “royal” we) simultaneously experience an event and (partially or completely) process it? Do we absolutely need memory to understand, or process, that experience (and to a certain degree validate it: if I remember it, it increases the odds that the event really did occur [and how does this take into account memory’s flaws — either distortions or inventions])? Once we recall the memory, we generate a regression. We can then recall ourselves recalling an event. And so on. And the fact that the memory is only a partial of the totality of the event as experienced (a sampled data subset that, by its nature, is not completely accurate).

Also, when consciousness begins. Is that “first” memory crucial in fixing when we become a completely sentient being, instead of a fleshy bag absorbing any or all sensations?

And for the religiously, or spiritually, inclined, is consciousness implicit in, and dependent on, the chemical and electrical actions of our brains? Wither consciousness freed from its earthly shell? Is consciousness a form of tapping into a layer of neuro-physics energy (“ether”?) wherein a being becomes a “node” on the “network”?

(I think, perforce, I might have too much time on my hands… But these questions underlie my poetry… Here’s to thinking on a more mundane track soon…)

Advertisements