Unconscious

Consciousness is that which observes and is the cause of every effect. Every single cell in our body has consciousness, but a better thing to say would be that consciousness pervades all things. The consciousness that we are aware of is "our consciousness", whilst the consciousness that we are unaware of is "our unconsciousness". Through focus, one may become conscious of things that they were once not conscious of. In essence, we are basically Gods that have the ability to control just about anything as long as our consciousness can be extended towards it, or rather, our awareness be extended into the consciousness of that which we wish to become conscious of.
 
When we are unconscious, we are basically running on autopilot, meaning that, for example, when you are not conscious of your eyelids, they will blink automatically. But, if we shift our awareness to our eyes, we are able to manipulate them in any manner we like (as long as it is physically possible ). This idea extends to other simple things like the Heart and thew Lungs,  but also complex things. One example being, perhaps a boy was beaten when he was younger by a man with a belt. He may grow up and somehow always have a nervous response of sweaty palms when seeing a belt, but the origin of the sweaty palms may never be recalled for the awareness has shifted away from this reaction and the consciousness has become unconscious.
 
The majority of our conscious activity is unconscious, thus it makes sense to assume that the unconscious aspect of ourselves has the most influence over our lives. In fact, the reason our world is in such a dismal state is because most of everyone is basically "Asleep"! Obviously, we have the ability to "awaken" and I just about think that this time has arrived, although this has nothing to do with the thread, we are living in extraordinary times, the greatest evolutionary shift in consciousness in our recorded history is in the process of occurring. Obviously it is very early to say this, but let us say. It Has Begun.

 

Freud stole most his thought, if not all, from Schopenhauer.

 

 
The majority of our conscious activity becomes unconscious... we can hard-wire data into our being, and render the data something intrinsic, inherent and unconscious to the functioning of our being, by way of, and after, conscious, reflective, thought...

 

idk.. unconscious and conscious seem like too definite of categories to understand what's really going on. people have varying degrees of unconsciousness about themselves in everyday life, so it's more a factor of how aware somebody is of how their life and experience works. the whole brain is just material working with energy, and the ego is how we translate that energy into the external world in relation to everything else - that's how Einstein's general theory of relativity works in describing time, so just have a good ego and everything will be fine

 

One small point, consciousness doesn't pervade every cell in our body. Cells have a number of ways  for reacting to stimuli, all of them chemical, they are not conscious.
 
 
MelT

 

 
Ur seeing things way too black and white, imo, friend... consciousness must not be discerned in black and white extermeities, i.e, "alive or dead" "conscious or unconscious", but in degrees and levels. All things are conscious... even cells -- cells and atoms know how to act to stimuli, i.e., encoded energy, on a mechanical and unconscious level (as my car, as a unified system, is aware and "knows" how to act when I stick the car key in the ingnition and turn it) , i.e., their being registers and is receptible to encoded energy.
 
The atoms of the keyboard are aware of and conscious (again, on a purely mechanical plane) of the influence of the atoms of my fingers pushing the keys; they may not be self-conscious of the influence, but they're recepetive to energy, as all conscious things are, i.e., the differnece in conscious things or consciousness lies in the said things degree and or level of receiving energy.

 

As a result of many inner mind voyages, I believe my unconscious to actually be more conscious than the consciousness I experience.  It's like having a whole other person in there that actually controls and does pretty much everything and I just basically sit around and watch it all happening.  I consider my unconscious to be far more intelligent than I, all the best art work I do is when I just sort of open the gate for my unconscious to flow through and that usually produces the most genius work.
I also have reason to believe my unconscious is not too fond of me, I'm not too sure why I have a few theories.  

To go to a more spiritual perspective, I believe my unconscious is god aware of it's true nature, I believe my consciousness is an aspect of god unaware of its true nature.  Anyway the unconscious mind holds far more in my opinion than mainstream psychology seems to believe it does.  

 

 
 None of the above is true. Mechanical effects aren't 'awareness' and it's playing with words tp say that they are. Giving or receiving energy also does not make anything conscious. Are you saying for example that a two-way radio is conscious?
 
 You invent your own version of what consciousness is and then pretend it is all forms of energy exchange. Matter isn't aware, cells aren't aware, and any exchange of energy they make is not done because the matter 'knows' anything, it's simply predetermined mechanical and chemical action.  
 
Please prove that this is wrong and that the cell is aware. No matter how much you wish it weren't the case, we can't change reality with our minds in any meaningful way.
 
 MelT

 

you both make good points, boats and hoes, and MeIT (getting into a debate over my head)...MeIT makes the stronger point imho, matter is ruled by the laws of 'nature'. i believe consciousness is being able to know you're conscious, being able to look into your own mind and review thoughts, emotions, habits and behaviors. i also believe one's consciousness is eternal, i'd like to elaborate but i'm not 100% sure how yet. thanks for listening

 

 
Ur restricting consciousness to self-consciousness, and, in turn, intertwining it with reflective and conscious thought, i.e., "knowing", which is wrong.
 
A baby doesn't "KNOW" that it's conscious, i.e., it's not self conscious of its hardwired and mechanical consciousness, so does that mean a baby isn't conscious...? Just because it doesn't "know"? No...
 

 

 
So, if the laws of nature rule something, doesn't that mean they practice some sort of influence on the said thing? And, how can the said thing react to the influnces without it being aware, unconsciously, of its functions and hard-wiring (as a unified system), in relation to the influences?
 
A stomach isn't aware that it digests food, i.e., it's not self-conscious of its own functioning... but it still does function and digest food (and in a purely mechanical and unconscious way); and not only does it digest food, but it digests different foods in different ways. Now, what is it about the stomach which allows it to differentiate between different aggregtions of atoms?? What is it about the stomach that allows it to discern a difference between things it comes into contact with?

 

i'm seeing your point more clearly boats and hoes, atoms and cells among many other things do what they do because...
 

i feel a little bit more enlightened, or should i say at ease.

 

 
Exactly.
 
Consciousness is something incredibly beautiful. Without it, the universe would forever remain unperceived.
Consciousness exists in degrees and levels, as Boats and Hoes said, but imo not as he meant it.
Each life form's 'core' is its unconscious or subconscious mind.
With very primitive beings (e.g. small insects), this core exists solemnly out of the survival instinct, and thus all their actions are a consequence of this core. Their conscious thoughts circulate solemly around survival: getting food, safety, sleep etc. 
These thoughts probably exist out of whatever senses they have (e.g. if their desire is food, they shall visualize getting their prey)
The reality they experience is a projection of their subconscious.
 
As life evolves, its degree in consciousness does too. A more evolved being will have evolved its subconscious mind from only the survival instinct to a mind harbouring more complex emotions.
As its senses have also improved, its conscious thoughts will be more complex. 
The life form gains the ability to link different elements and reason ("instead of going from A to B to get food, maybe climbing this tree could make things easier?")
 
Consciousness is an extremely complex creation of nature and it might very well be the most. It is incredible to think about the fact that life is but a consequence of these correct circumstances. 
That's why i think there might be more to it.
What if the universe needs life in order to live? What if the universe needs an observer, needs to be perceived, in order for it to live?
The universe has the same goal as biological life: to survive. To do this, it uses a very a logical way:
it maximizes its chance of survival through infinite randomness.
You could compare this to pi: an infinite, random number contains all possible combinations of numbers.
How does it do it? Using the Forces of Nature (gravity etc.), which could be seen as nature's tools of survival.
Like that, it creates all possible circumstances for life to emerge, and our beloved planet Earth was one of the bullseyes.

 

 
1.) I meant it exactly as u describe it... how did u take it?   The "core" u speak of is the underlying unity I refer to; as things being hard-wired "unified systems"; unified systems which strive to perpetuate and or enhance their being (whether conscious or unconsciously). Have u ever heard of Plato's forms? And the long debate concerning universals and particulars? Science doesn't posit that things have a "core" or a underlying unity...
 
2.) U equte conscious thought with the complexity of sensory-experience... well, since the senses cannot think or "reason", as u put it, what is that's thinking about the data provided from the senses? What "reasons" and makes conscious decisions about the happenings of sensory-experience? There are animals out there who's senses are much more astute, keen, and precise than ours, in many respects... but that doesn't mean their thought is more complex than ours or that they can consciously "reason" in a intricate and complex manner.
 
3.) Hence, Berkeley's famous conclusion... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs1MeDUgEOA