Hello There, Guest! Register

[Forcing] Nietzsche, the origin of consciousness, and Tulpas
Ouroboros Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 4
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2017
#11
 
RE: Nietzsche, the origin of consciousness, and Tulpas
Quote:TheBlackWizard

I'm just gonna have to explain the first part of your post with the Will to Power. The sublimation of your overall force into yourself, into an artistic strive: A Tulpa. I guess I'm gonna have to conclude that every Tulpa is a work of art.

I sadly cannot agree on most of your second post, because, as you said, it is very metaphysical. I won't argue with it however, because antinomies would take hold of this and we should go in a circle (antinomies mean that for every metaphysical explanation, there is a non-metaphysical one, and vice versa; it's therefore pretty much exactly 50:50 and you can choose which one you like)

I think you're right about a sheer endless amount of entities constituting consciousness, but I disagree with your atomism that is they all can be named and put into categories.


Quote:tulpa001

Quote:Um, I guess it's just a bad joke.

I'm sorry, I couldn't tell you were joking  Smile

Quote:You are correct that my definition reduces to willpower or volition. As this is what will usually means.
Quote:As this is what will usually means.
You've been reading too much Wittgenstein. The language games we play in which we collectively decide what means what holds no truth other than what we give it, and what we give it "commonly", "usually", is no indication as to its truthfulness.

Quote:this will is still several concepts removed from consciousness.

It's not though. It's subconscious AND conscious. It includes both. You can THINK you want something while your "true" Will, the subconscious one at that, actually wants something more than that. This is what I have been implying in the OP. The formation of Will is a product of the subconscious until it becomes conscious in communication, which is what we're all about in tulpamancy. This is congruent to what is written in the original quote by Nietzsche (christ, he even mentions Leibniz' assumption). If you'd read the entire thing I linked you would have known that.

Quote:I hesitate to say necessity caused language, or that language came after consciousness
Seems pretty clear to me. Monkey comes, needs to warn others about something, can't make himself clear enough, everyone dies. Unless Monkey makes himself intelligible through some form of language, this will happen over and over again.
Quote:language evolved, and consciousness evolved.
Are you saying that language evolved proportionally to consciousness?  That would solidify my position, rather.
Quote:Well, that makes it sound downright like the ancient theory of movement.
This is why I didn't mention the Will to Life over Nietzsche's Will to Power, which is more of an attempt at a myth than a systematic philosophy; Schopenhauer was the last systemic philosopher before Nietzsche tore all of that apart.
(This post was last modified: 09-08-2017, 08:21 PM by Ouroboros.)
09-08-2017, 08:20 PM
Find Reply
Myshkin Offline
Member
Registered

Posts: 15
Threads: 1
Joined: Jun 2017
#12
 
RE: Nietzsche, the origin of consciousness, and Tulpas
(09-08-2017, 08:20 PM)Ouroboros Wrote: Leading this back to the OP, language (in all of its forms) is the invention of consciousness. The need for the invention of language, however, was necessity itself, an ability to communicate the needs of the "herd" and its individuals. 
Quote:Seems pretty clear to me. Monkey comes, needs to warn others about something, can't make himself clear enough, everyone dies. Unless Monkey makes himself intelligible through some form of language, this will happen over and over again.

I suppose it depends on how you define both consciousness and language. Ants and other social insects, which very few people would call conscious beings, are nevertheless perfectly capable of communication, just not through spoken and written language as humans do.

For death begins with life's first breath, 
And life begins at touch of death.
09-08-2017, 08:51 PM
Find Reply
tulpa001 Online
<void>
Forum Moderators

Posts: 1,958
Threads: 27
Joined: Aug 2016
All Accounts Posts: 2,015
#13
 
RE: Nietzsche, the origin of consciousness, and Tulpas
(09-08-2017, 08:20 PM)Ouroboros Wrote: You've been reading too much Wittgenstein. The language games we play in which we collectively decide what means what holds no truth other than what we give it, and what we give it "commonly", "usually", is no indication as to its truthfulness.
A word is a label. So your statements there are incontrovertibly true. But your point is not clear.

Quote:It's not though. It's subconscious AND conscious. It includes both. You can THINK you want something while your "true" Will, the subconscious one at that, actually wants something more than that. This is what I have been implying in the OP. The formation of Will is a product of the subconscious until it becomes conscious in communication, which is what we're all about in tulpamancy. This is congruent to what is written in the original quote by Nietzsche (christ, he even mentions Leibniz' assumption).
This is interesting from a tulpa's perspective. See, from a plural perspective, a tulpa behaves as a part of your subconscious, and you behave as part of your tulpa's subconscious. Both act without the other's will or knowledge, seemingly automatically, and using information and skill the other cannot tap into directly.

Quote:If you'd read the entire thing I linked you would have known that.
You're the expert. Distil the core points for us to consume. The forum is not a dedicated philosophy forum.

Quote:Seems pretty clear to me. Monkey comes, needs to warn others about something, can't make himself clear enough, everyone dies. Unless Monkey makes himself intelligible through some form of language, this will happen over and over again.
This is a handwave. And a standard evolution argument. Keep in mind I don't consider this a compliment. Standard evolution arguments are inherently bad at demonstrating why the stories they depict are anything more than a catchy origin story.

Quote:Are you saying that language evolved proportionally to consciousness?  That would solidify my position, rather.
It's very unlikely they evolved proportionately. However, it is likely they evolved over similar time frames.

Host comments in italics. Tulpa's log. Tulpa's guide.
09-09-2017, 12:14 AM
Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | Tulpa.Info | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication