@@>>>> William Elliot on "Biological Consciousness"
 
 DM>> What I meant was that "merely human" consciousness is physical
 DM>> ...(likely) of no more meaning (though more interesting) than
 DM>> any other organ talents.
 
 WE> A conjecture without any substantive evidence one way or the other.
 
  I think we can develope enough circumstantial evidence to satisfy
  me (at least for now), I don't know how much or what kind you would
  be willing to accept or even explore.
 
 DM>> Whatever specialized functions it was developed to satisfy, there
 DM>> is no information in my database to indicate an any
 DM>> "MORE-OR-LESS- OF-IT.
 
 WE> Don't understand.
 
    *MORE* than just a "PHYSICAL"  (beyond an electrochemical device).
    *LESS* just a "PHYSICAL"       (          electrochemical device).
 
 DM>> I "think" our differences are (perhaps) those of how we measure
 DM>> it's IMPORTANCE. Your yardstick (seems so?) indicates a value for
 DM>> consciousness that my yardstick is not yet long enough to measure.
 DM>> I enjoy consciousness, and wonder about it.   You do the same but
 DM>> add other more epic extensions of meaning/importance to it.
 
 WE> Yup without consciousness there'd be no universe that I'd be
 WE> concerned about.
 
   Agreed as a condition of death when what you say becomes true.
   I *think* the universe would still be there and not caring
   whether you're concerned or not. Perhaps a mite selfish as
   "conscious thought" while others alive, might still be concerned
   with the universe. I DO struggle with this puzzle of transitory
   importance whereas we, individual or species, do make a bit of noise
   and poof, we AND our consciousness are gone. As long as I'm *alive*
   I would find the universe interesting whether my consciousness is
   biological (likely) or some more or less unknown other. For me,
   reality does not seem a "meaning less", if its primary device mechanism
   turns out to be "just another" (to die) organ. It is all some fun while
   lasting "....our species, our perk" !!
           ......................Perhaps dolphins have even more fun ???
 
   NOTE: If we are including *religious insights* into the "consciousness
   packaging", I back off     ........such of private wisdoms *presently*
   seeming alien to what I can believe. Also! some years back, my wife
   during high fever, experienced an "out of body experience" that she
   said seemed "life real". In it she looked down upon herself. We never
   thought it more than a dream type happening (Mentioned as an only
   shot at consciousness projected out of its fleshen roots). Though I
   oft read about such "otherish" notions of "consciousness", (things
   akin to near death experiences), I remain some ............skeptical.
 
 DM>> Consciousness is some fuzzy for me to nail down, but as I said
 DM>> originally, it does not  "knowingly" exist beyond the life of
 DM>> its container, and so would suggest reasonable assumptions.
 
 WE> From prehistory to tomorrow, there's no available definition.
 
  WE might ANYWAY *work with* some assumed (still fragmentary) models
  and a bit of reasoning. Such an approach might be first steps in
  deciphering "consciousness" into what I believe is just another
  (much more novel) physical organ (or your "perhaps" MORE in a
  developing view).
 
 DM>> If you have other exhibits of evidence, or good reasoning, for
 DM>> a MORE-OF-IT, my attention is lively.
 
 WE> A good knock on the head will give you a 'less of it', and for
 WE> 'more of it', a bucket of cold water.
 
 .....yes that might work .....I'll assume we either don't agree OR
 mutual clarity is not likely at this time. ..............Pardon' ?
 
                                                        @@>--- Dave
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------