<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Upper Fort Stewart</title>
	<atom:link href="http://upperfortstewart.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://upperfortstewart.com</link>
	<description>The Somewhat Amusing Blog of Ian Stewart</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:09:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind by Dylan Procter</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/21/the-origin-of-consciousness-in-the-breakdown-of-the-bicameral-mind/#comment-1008</link>
		<dc:creator>Dylan Procter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:09:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=544#comment-1008</guid>
		<description>Well, ya.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, ya.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind by Ian Stewart</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/21/the-origin-of-consciousness-in-the-breakdown-of-the-bicameral-mind/#comment-1007</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Stewart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 18:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=544#comment-1007</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s the &quot;only became aware well after the establishment of &lt;em&gt;entire empires&lt;/em&gt;&quot; that gets me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s the &#8220;only became aware well after the establishment of <em>entire empires</em>&#8221; that gets me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind by Dylan Procter</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/21/the-origin-of-consciousness-in-the-breakdown-of-the-bicameral-mind/#comment-1006</link>
		<dc:creator>Dylan Procter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:44:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=544#comment-1006</guid>
		<description>@Ian- The strangest thing is that contentions along these lines are not terribly uncommon in Western Philosophy.  It may seem obviously ludicrous, (and may actually &lt;i&gt;be&lt;/i&gt; obviously ludicrous) but things are a little tendentious once one asks at what point, specifically, human beings became (and possibly become) self-aware.  

It seems to me that there are at least these possibilities:

-Human beings have always been self aware (requires and infinite past, which is self contradictory).
-Human beings are self aware from the beginning of their existence (contrary to observable evidence- babies don&#039;t appear to be self-aware at birth, and there might be reason to propose that humanity became self-aware at some point in history).
-Human beings become self aware at some point in their history (this could be either their shared history, as in humanity becoming self-aware, or else their personal history, as in an individual becoming self-aware).

Of the three, it seems to me that only the last is possible, or possibly knowable at least.  It does however give rise to two problems so far as I can see.  At the outset one might consider who it was that was first self-conscious, and then how it is they came to be so, having not been so previously.  Specifically, one is left to explain the mechanism of self-consciousness.

To provide a fine-grained account of the mechanism that produces human self-awareness might be a huge job.  However, perhaps we can agree that (in no particular order):

-in order to be self-aware human beings must be capable of abstraction (which is possible via application of the Law of Contradiction)
-that self-awareness requires that the concept of &#039;identity&#039; must be abstracted
-in order to be self aware human beings must have concepts (self-consciousness is conceptual, after all)
-that concepts are language dependent (not on a particular language, but at least dependent on an abstract relation of identities).

If there is anything to the posits above, then self awareness is in fact language dependent.  It is a huge leap to get from there to print- especially because what will stand here as &#039;language&#039; is for more rudimentary than anything one would normally envision when defining the term.  However, having not read the book (which I thoroughly intend to once I can track down copy) I wonder if Jaynes isn&#039;t attempting to work out how self-consciousness becomes a shared experience.  

It is one thing to say that &quot;this &#039;ape&#039;, at this point in time, at this place, by this process became self-aware&quot; but is surely something entirely different from saying &quot;humankind, at this point in time, at this place, by this process became self-aware.&quot;  The real difficulty, is that if you are going to say that human beings &#039;became&#039; self-conscious, you can&#039;t really get away with saying one without implicitly positing the other.

You should head up a reading group.  I&#039;m in if you do, could lead to some interesting discussion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Ian- The strangest thing is that contentions along these lines are not terribly uncommon in Western Philosophy.  It may seem obviously ludicrous, (and may actually <i>be</i> obviously ludicrous) but things are a little tendentious once one asks at what point, specifically, human beings became (and possibly become) self-aware.  </p>
<p>It seems to me that there are at least these possibilities:</p>
<p>-Human beings have always been self aware (requires and infinite past, which is self contradictory).<br />
-Human beings are self aware from the beginning of their existence (contrary to observable evidence- babies don&#8217;t appear to be self-aware at birth, and there might be reason to propose that humanity became self-aware at some point in history).<br />
-Human beings become self aware at some point in their history (this could be either their shared history, as in humanity becoming self-aware, or else their personal history, as in an individual becoming self-aware).</p>
<p>Of the three, it seems to me that only the last is possible, or possibly knowable at least.  It does however give rise to two problems so far as I can see.  At the outset one might consider who it was that was first self-conscious, and then how it is they came to be so, having not been so previously.  Specifically, one is left to explain the mechanism of self-consciousness.</p>
<p>To provide a fine-grained account of the mechanism that produces human self-awareness might be a huge job.  However, perhaps we can agree that (in no particular order):</p>
<p>-in order to be self-aware human beings must be capable of abstraction (which is possible via application of the Law of Contradiction)<br />
-that self-awareness requires that the concept of &#8216;identity&#8217; must be abstracted<br />
-in order to be self aware human beings must have concepts (self-consciousness is conceptual, after all)<br />
-that concepts are language dependent (not on a particular language, but at least dependent on an abstract relation of identities).</p>
<p>If there is anything to the posits above, then self awareness is in fact language dependent.  It is a huge leap to get from there to print- especially because what will stand here as &#8216;language&#8217; is for more rudimentary than anything one would normally envision when defining the term.  However, having not read the book (which I thoroughly intend to once I can track down copy) I wonder if Jaynes isn&#8217;t attempting to work out how self-consciousness becomes a shared experience.  </p>
<p>It is one thing to say that &#8220;this &#8216;ape&#8217;, at this point in time, at this place, by this process became self-aware&#8221; but is surely something entirely different from saying &#8220;humankind, at this point in time, at this place, by this process became self-aware.&#8221;  The real difficulty, is that if you are going to say that human beings &#8216;became&#8217; self-conscious, you can&#8217;t really get away with saying one without implicitly positing the other.</p>
<p>You should head up a reading group.  I&#8217;m in if you do, could lead to some interesting discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind by Ian Stewart</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/21/the-origin-of-consciousness-in-the-breakdown-of-the-bicameral-mind/#comment-1005</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Stewart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:59:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=544#comment-1005</guid>
		<description>No mention of Buddha (though I&#039;ve still a third to go) but his definition of consciousness is pretty strict and somewhat peculiar to himself. That alone is worth reading the book for.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No mention of Buddha (though I&#8217;ve still a third to go) but his definition of consciousness is pretty strict and somewhat peculiar to himself. That alone is worth reading the book for.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of The Bicameral Mind by trish roque</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/21/the-origin-of-consciousness-in-the-breakdown-of-the-bicameral-mind/#comment-1004</link>
		<dc:creator>trish roque</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 03:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=544#comment-1004</guid>
		<description>Does he make any mention at all about the original Buddha, aka Siddhartha Gautama who, although there were no written texts in his time, still managed to achieve consciousness &amp; also helped countless others who could neither read nor write, to achieve consciousness?

I&#039;ve found myself recently fascinated by neuroscience and the effects of meditation on the brain - reading all sorts of books about it.  Is this book worth putting on the list or will it just make me cringe? Your take on it makes me think it&#039;s the latter.

Seriously? The voice of God???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does he make any mention at all about the original Buddha, aka Siddhartha Gautama who, although there were no written texts in his time, still managed to achieve consciousness &amp; also helped countless others who could neither read nor write, to achieve consciousness?</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve found myself recently fascinated by neuroscience and the effects of meditation on the brain &#8211; reading all sorts of books about it.  Is this book worth putting on the list or will it just make me cringe? Your take on it makes me think it&#8217;s the latter.</p>
<p>Seriously? The voice of God???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I&#8217;m growing a soul patch by Ian Stewart</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/09/im-growing-a-soul-patch/#comment-997</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Stewart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:43:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=539#comment-997</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;why do people call it a “soul patch”?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

This isn&#039;t the setup for a joke at my expense, is it? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>why do people call it a “soul patch”?</p></blockquote>
<p>This isn&#8217;t the setup for a joke at my expense, is it? <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I&#8217;m growing a soul patch by Cristi</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/09/im-growing-a-soul-patch/#comment-996</link>
		<dc:creator>Cristi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=539#comment-996</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been trying to grow a bear for the last year or so... Or I should say I&#039;ve stopped shaving... 

Btw, why do people call it a &quot;soul patch&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been trying to grow a bear for the last year or so&#8230; Or I should say I&#8217;ve stopped shaving&#8230; </p>
<p>Btw, why do people call it a &#8220;soul patch&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I&#8217;m growing a soul patch by Ryan Markel</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/09/im-growing-a-soul-patch/#comment-995</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Markel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 20:05:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=539#comment-995</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;More data is required.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You know what this means: beard!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>More data is required.</p></blockquote>
<p>You know what this means: beard!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I&#8217;m growing a soul patch by hanni</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/06/09/im-growing-a-soul-patch/#comment-994</link>
		<dc:creator>hanni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 19:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=539#comment-994</guid>
		<description>Photo required.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Photo required.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on One-column Madness by Ian Stewart</title>
		<link>http://upperfortstewart.com/2010/05/28/one-column-madness/#comment-993</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Stewart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://upperfortstewart.com/?p=510#comment-993</guid>
		<description>For a WordPress.org blog you&#039;d want to use this in a Child Theme after importing the Twenty Ten stylesheet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a WordPress.org blog you&#8217;d want to use this in a Child Theme after importing the Twenty Ten stylesheet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
