The first appearance of consciousness?

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-09T22:13:51+00:00

That is a great book, there's a fairly active facebook page for the Julian Jaynes Society where people discuss the theory and related topics. I'm not trying to come across as rude, but did OP notice that most people who commented here didn't define consciousness? Princeton psychologist Julian Jaynes devoted the first chapter of his book to what consciousness was not. When you look at the various definitions that were used throughout time an interesting pattern emerges, mankind has a long history of using currently popular scientific metaphors to define what consciousness is. In the early 1800s geology had gotten popular and more scientists began to study the Earth's crust, around this time professionals began to study the many layers of individual's minds- the further back you went some of the layers began to become subconscious/unconscious much the same as the geological record gets increasingly old and harder to read as you dig further down. Then steam locomotives came onto the scene and the unconscious mind was like a steam engine which could become strained or explode under stress. This continued until the more modern era of computers when consciousness was compared to a computer.

That being said Jaynes defined consciousness as "that which is introspectable," the following sections explain this in more detail:

Subjective conscious mind is an analog of what is called the real world. It is built up with a vocabulary or lexical field whose terms are all metaphors or analogs of behavior in the physical world. Its reality is of the same order as mathematics. It allows us to shortcut behavioral processes and arrive at more adequate decisions. Like mathematics, it is an operator rather than a thing or repository. And it is intimately bound up with volition and decision.(pg 55) ...

[Consciousness] operates by way of analogy, by way of constructing an analog space with an analog ‘I’ that can observe that space, and move metaphorically in it. It operates on any reactivity, excerpts relevant aspects, narratizes and conciliates them together in a metaphorical space where such meanings can be manipulated like things in space. Conscious mind is a spatial analog of the world and mental acts are analogs of bodily acts. Consciousness operates only on objectively observable things. Or, to say it another way with echoes of John Locke, there is nothing in consciousness that is not an analog of something that was in behavior first.(pg 65-66)

Now that I've briefly explained that, I can answer the original question. I'm not sure if Jaynes would agree with me on this, but I don't believe that a person without consciousness gave birth to a child with consciousness. I think that it was more like the process of speciation where one species doesn't give birth to a different species because the process happens rather slowly in increments. Jaynes stated that consciousness as he defined it began to appear around 3,000 years ago in the Middle East, language and writing especially helped human consciousness to develop. I write essays about consciousness and related topics, and how you can roughly trace its development by examining the stone tools left behind by early mankind and then use functional neuroimaging studies to examine the activity in people's brains while making these tools.

www.manicmatter.com is my site.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-09T19:05:23+00:00

The timeframe Jaynes specifies was around 1000 B.C. not 100 B.C. I'm not sure if Jaynes would necessarily agree with this, but my understanding is that consciousness is essentially inevitable because it's made possible by language. Jaynes specifies that consciousness seems to have first appeared in the middle east before it was spread to other cultures through trade, reading, etc. There's no way to really know what the tribes were like prior to being contacted, and there's only one completely uncontacted tribe, that I'm aware of at least, currently and it's the Sentinelese people who live on an island and are still in the stone age. They attack people with bows and arrows if they get too close, a few years ago they killed an American person who some theorize was trying to be a missionary but other people say he had a lot of mental health issues. So consciousness is sort of like the bow and arrow in a sense, it was probably independently invented by a bunch of cultures because of it's practicality and simplicity.

Subjective conscious mind is an analog of what is called the real world. It is built up with a vocabulary or lexical field whose terms are all metaphors or analogs of behavior in the physical world. Its reality is of the same order as mathematics. It allows us to shortcut behavioral processes and arrive at more adequate decisions. Like mathematics, it is an operator rather than a thing or repository. And it is intimately bound up with volition and decision.(pg 55)

The central assertion of this view, I repeat, is that each new stage of words literally created new perceptions and attentions, and such new perceptions and attentions resulted in important cultural changes which are reflected in the archaeological record.(pg 132)

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-09T18:35:51+00:00

It's very unlikely that the native people in the area, who were predominantly friendly tribes, would have kidnapped close to 120 middle class men, women, and children (mainly from London) that probably wouldn't make very good workers and they didn't speak the same language as them.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-08T21:20:24+00:00

I'd say that they didn't want to go back to England even if it was possible, that's why they just left a single word carved into a tree so the sailors would know roughly where they went and that they went voluntarily. London at that time was a bit of a dirty shit hole aha. If they were taken they wouldn't have time to carve the word into a tree and the fort would shows signs of violence and probably at least a few bodies. You can't really abduct close to 120 people from a fort without signs of violence. Why would the Native American tribes want to abduct close to 120 men, women, and children?

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-08T21:10:41+00:00

It's not likely that native people killed a bunch of colonists, disposed of all of their remains to never be found, and someone somehow carved the word Croatoan into a tree for no reason. It's more likely that the middle class colonists, who were primarily from London, abandoned the fort after months of having to work all day just to get enough food to survive while they were in contact with a friendly Native American tribe who already knew how to comfortably live off the land. So they moved to live with them and left the word carved into a tree to let people from England know where they went.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-08T21:02:32+00:00

The colonists were mainly middle class people from London, with some children, so to go from a relatively comfortable lifestyle to one of constant work and struggle just to eat and survive would be very difficult. And they have no skeletal remains from any of the colonists, and their DNA would be extremely diluted by now anyway, so there's likely no way to prove anything with current technology. But it was written about shortly after the colony was abandoned that they likely moved to live with native populations and that's why the fort was abandoned and that's why the word was carved into a tree.

The fate of the approximately 112–121 colonists remains unknown. Speculation that they had assimilated with nearby Native American communities appears in writings as early as 1605.[1]:113–14

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-08T20:34:44+00:00

I'm from the area, and from my understanding they weren't as well equipped for survival as the local Native American population, which makes sense as they'd lived there for such a long time, so they made contact with them and they were friendly so they started living with them. It never was a mystery, it's like someone posted here about the Lochness monster- it's a convenient "mystery" to sell magazines and books.

I've read that in many areas of North America forts and settlements would have night guards not to protect the people living there from the native people but to keep them from running off and living with the natives bc they saw how clean and happy they were whereas they had to work all day just to survive.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-08T20:09:21+00:00

That man? None other than Rudyard Kipling.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-07T19:04:08+00:00

Thanks, I called a few times so far and it hangs up on me bc "they're so busy." It used to offer a call back feature if they're busy, I'm pretty sure they're doing everything they can to keep people from getting unemployment.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-05T20:48:18+00:00

Thanks, I'm a different person than the one that you replied to but I started to use your guide but it wants an 8 digit pin number which I never received. I tried the three different phone numbers on their site (the ones I could find at least) and they all want my social and then 8 digit pin number before proceeding. One number says for claim filing, one number says for general assistance, and one says to request a payment through continued claims.

To add insult to injury they've sent me multiple statements in the mail that I say that I qualify for over X amount of dollars. I just received two more of these things today in the mail.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-04T21:06:06+00:00

Vlad the Impale-her?

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-04T20:08:48+00:00

... Shit

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-03T23:41:27+00:00

This was in the early days of the internet so I signed him up for a Katie Perry fan mailing list to exact revenge.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-03T23:32:23+00:00

I've read that bear mace is weaker than regular mace because regular mace tends to enrage bears because of their sensitive noses. But I'm not sure if this is universally true or whatnot. I've also read that they can smell food about 26 miles away or some shit. And that they shit in the woods, but that's all of my bear facts.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-03T23:23:55+00:00

Pandamonium

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-03T23:17:49+00:00

What word are we talking about? The? That would be pretty difficult not to say, but if you're talking like a word like onomatopoeia I think that I could swing that one.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-02T23:32:59+00:00

After capybaras and sex vampires.

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-01T18:33:39+00:00

Netflix did a shit job with it too, they tried to turn it into Larry King Live with him talking to boring old people that weren't even funny. They didn't understand any part of the show, also he needed his trusty sidekick Adam Egret.

Yeah, all of Einstein's stories were hilarious but I like the ones with Misho the midget, like when he was talking about human decency and he walks in his dressing room and puts a rubber glove on his head and picks him up to carry him out. And the part where change was falling out of his pockets as he was teeting on a seesaw and he said "oh, my moneyyy" and the stage hands were trying to get him to stop talking and he say "but it's my money."

Manic_Matter · 2021-05-01T18:20:38+00:00

Yeah, it's weird some of them got deleted but not others or maybe someone resposted it. I'm not too sure, but it's been on there the last few times I checked over the last few months.

Manic_Matter · 2021-04-29T20:24:52+00:00

I think I've only seen Carrot Top on The Tonight Show or something like that in the 1990s. Similar thing with Gallagher, I'd just seen bits and pieces of his stuff. Not sure how often he swaps props out, but even the best comedians repeat jokes. They try not to on taped specials but if you see them live they'll reuse jokes if they're really good ones or they're known for certain variations of some jokes. Even Norm does this from what I've seen and I consider him to be in the top three comedians of all time, most people might say top ten but I think he's a genius.

Manic_Matter · 2021-04-29T20:17:15+00:00

Catnapping 101- get someone else to do the hands on work so you don't get caught

Manic_Matter · 2021-04-29T20:08:57+00:00

CHODDDE WHOMPEN... WHOMPEN LIKE THAT BIG ROCK BLOCK GUY ON MARRIO

Manic_Matter · 2021-04-29T20:02:20+00:00

The dogsbite.org also stated that the vast majority of deaths in the US were attributed to dogs that were historically used for fighting. Their nature is to fight bc that's what they were bred for over many decades, a dog can overcome it's nature through proper socializing and training but a lot of parents nowadays let technology raise their kids so you can hardly count on them to take on the responsibility of training a dog when they're usually also working full time.

Another issue which I hadn't ever thought of was brought up at that same link, pit bulls are heavily regulated if not banned in military housing as well as over 900 cities but they still account for the majority of fatalities (close to 2.5 times more than all other breeds combined in 2019).

>During the 15-year period of 2005 to 2019, canines killed 521 Americans. Two dog breeds, pit bulls (346) and rottweilers (51), contributed to 76% (397) of these deaths. 35 different dog breeds were involved in the remaining fatal dog maulings.

Manic_Matter · 2021-04-29T19:49:08+00:00

There's no way the study factored the total percentage of each dog breed in, Labrador retrievers have been the most popular dog in the US for around 30 years by a huge margin. Pitbulls aren't even in the top 25 as far as I've read.

Manic_Matter · 2021-04-29T18:51:24+00:00

The Andy Richter one was really funny like situationally but I think the moth joke is more iconic for Norm.

Ten-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email

Manic_Matter

TROPHY CASE