what is going here?
I a conscious entity - reflecting on my conscious states refer to them -
the totality - actual and possible - as what - a thing - consciousness -
as an existent - that has all these states?
I don't know that this works
what is it these states are states of - inhere in?
Descartes was clear - a substance -
and if you want to take this view - problem solved at one level
the question what this substance is - next issue -
a different substance to the physical -
again - not satisfactory in itself - without theological trappings -
vestments you might say -
however if you don't go the substance route - where are you?
conscious states
and being conscious of conscious states
the latter presumably - a meta state -
and state?
an event -
what kind of event - a conscious event -
perhaps - an event that exists - or can exist within - the same kind
of an event
existing within - here meaning - self-consciousness
however you might say the same can be said of physical events
that they are within a system of physical events
if so - the 'being within' does not uniquely characterize conscious events
the elephant in the room is awareness
and the question - how can awareness - explicate itself?
how can I by being aware elucidate awareness - say what it is?
except negatively - a conscious event - is not a non-conscious event
an analytical argument -
which just seem to confirm that - awareness cannot be elucidated -
but then as to elucidation -
is it not the case - that the physical - the material world - is only
given any sharpness - relative to - an idea of the non-material
elucidation is really the issue of consciousness
elucidation is only possible given consciousness
in reflecting on my conscious states
I objectify
I categorize them as conscious
consciousness per se is a construction
therefore - a conscious event?
that is meant to signify all events
what could this mean - how could this happen?
putting that aside for a moment -
consciousness is a construction
a reflection - of consciousness
the subject regarding itself as object -
but strictly speaking isn't this impossible?
the subject creating a false object?
in a way - yes - if you mean by object that outside of consciousness
but the thing is - isn't this just what awareness is
consciousness aware of itself
now just here - you could easily go to the idea that awareness -
consciousness is - what - an illusion?
the idea of the subject making itself object
the argument being that this can't happen
therefore self-consciousness - self awareness - a logical illusion
it happens - but it is all wrong
so this would be to say
consciousness can't ascribe itself - there is no itself
and therefore can't be ascribed - at all
I was reading the first part of Peter Strawson's 'Persons' -
and he starts in discussing the idea of ascribing conscious states with Wittgenstein's view that 'In an important sense there is no subject' -
and much to my surprise that is where I have ended up
