If a tree falls in the forest, but there is no one around to hear it, makes a sound?
George Berkeley
I want to go on a topic touched on in this
post. I state that has little to do with
neuroscience, it is a speculation
in a field in which they are profane.
discussing the
awareness of itself, whose definition is not trivial, perhaps, in the discussion of the time it was spoken of as the ability to someone to refer your attention to expressions of their inner self and one's own behavior
. Increased awareness of self, the greater the amount of information
on
if themselves accessible
explicitly, with "explicit" should be understood in analogy with the 'learning
implicit / explicit: the criterion is thus the ability to verbalize
's
information you have.
was said in the post that there are ways to expand their individual
awareness of self
, for comparison, you can read this
blog. Finally, if struggling this quality is a means or an end.
In this post I will argue that:
1. the conscious manipulation of behavior has advantages and disadvantages, and seems to be the ultimate goal of learning;
2. human actions do not seem motivated by a need for greater awareness and a greater awareness does not seem to answer the essential questions to which human behavior (including the pursuit of self-awareness) provides an answer.
its first point, I refer to the fact that the visit to consciously analyze data is against our will, in short, is a byproduct of the end we want to achieve. For example, when we learned to drive, we crossed a phase in which every action was carefully controlled. In fact we could not drive, if we think about every move! We would be too slow, because consciousness has a capacity too low.
The same goes for other types of procedural learning. Competence is precisely because this does not require the mediation of attention. Apply this speech conceptual learning may seem inappropriate, but let's try. Think of the language. We think to the associations "overlearned", ie ultra-learned, such as between the face and the name of our loved ones. This is an example of explicit memory, but over the course of time becomes implicit, and no longer requires our attention (Note in passing that this would depend on the consolidation of information, initially codified the hippocampus, cerebral cortex).
When talking of Leopardi, and my interlocutor told me: "In your opinion how long it took him to write these masterpieces Leopardi? Months? Years? No. threw them down as well, because it was so infused with classical he was natural. "
Here, responsibility is this to which we aspire. And I think it is even for the things of life: we want to behave differently, but smoothly, effortlessly.
Awareness is a very useful tool, whenever we must adapt our behavior. If, for example, there recassimo in Britain, would be terribly dangerous to cross the road rely on the experience gained elsewhere!
So the self-awareness is when we want to adapt. We live in a complex environment in which this requirement occurs often, then a greater awareness may actually be beneficial.
But then there is this amount? There are degrees that one can win? Once earned a degree you can go back? In agreement with the idea that it is an instrument of adaptation, it is plausible to think that it serves more as soon as conditions change, when compared to remain stable. And then, if the adaptation phase is born come transitoria, ci si potrebbe chiedere: ma davvero noi ci vogliamo adattare? Qual è la pressione che ci induce a compiere questo sforzo? Forse il dolore, o l'ambizione?
Se uno osserva la storia umana, forse è più propenso ad affermare che l'uomo cerca di adattare l'ambiente alle proprie esigenze. Diciamocielo francamente: con tutta la nostra autoconsapevolezza, cambiare il nostro comportamento - o addirittura la nostra personalità - è una fatica bestiale. Mica è detto che sia la soluzione migliore, peraltro. Potremmo cercare di mantenerci nella nostra "nicchia ecologica" e dedicare attenzione ad altre cose, che non siano il miglioramento di noi stessi. Potremmo anche solo goderci la vita. Che motivazione abbiamo per fare altrimenti?
Ecco, secondo me le azioni che noi compiamo rispondono a dei bisogni. Alcuni sono basilari. Ma la nostra vita non si esaurisce a questi: se così fosse faremmo come i leoni, che riposano circa 20 ore al giorno.
Io trovo che la domanda fondamentale a cui cerchiamo risposta se la sia fatta Cartesio. La domanda è: come faccio a sapere che esisto?
Uno potrebbe pensare che una simile domanda astratta richieda già un certo talento concettuale. Non è così, perché si può domandarselo implicitamente. La cosa è chiarissima in contesto sociale: ciascuno è alla ricerca di indizi che testimonino la considerazione che di lui/lei gli altri hanno. Cosa pensa "x" di me? Quanto valgo? È appropriato che mi comporti in un certo modo? Le percezioni sono poco potenti nell'assicurarci che esistiamo: non ci basta guardarci intorno e così constatare la funzionalità del nostro sistema visivo. Noi cerchiamo effetti, cerchiamo tracce del nostro impatto nel mondo. Vogliamo essere riconosciuti (si leggano "Le notti bianche" citate nel post precedente). Quando uno grida ed esercita violenza, cerca di ottenere un impatto che altrimenti non sarebbe alla sua portata. Quando uno lavora e riceve stima, denaro, o un manufatto, trova la rassicurazione che egli esiste. Quando uno guarda i suoi figli, trova in essi la certezza: "Da me si è originato questo essere vivente". Quando facciamo shopping sfrenato, quando divoriamo la cena, non These consumer goods may become evidence of our impact?
And death that scares us so much, is it not the moment when we cease to exist? As a good nerd
, the individual response of Descartes, paladin type of self-awareness, is: Cogito, ergo sum. The doubt substantiates the man. But this is the answer to Descartes. If one looks around, see people working 12 hours a day, people who undertake to make money, people are busy in social relationships, people who want to go on TV. All responses to the primary instance: there, have an impact, be seen and recognized.
Ago, ergo sum . Descartes was a thinker, and therefore its action has been unraveled through the manipulation of thought. It is a remarkable case, because it produces a feedback sensor (eg a smile friend or crafts). It is similar in this religion.
In all cases, including that of religion, it does not seem to be able to convince you, beyond repair, its existence and individuality. In the case of religion, is the existence of God that I substance, and our actions have an impact in the History of Salvation. A core of religion lies in the possibility of acting on the gods, a fact particularly evident in the most ancient cults. In key Catholic could even read the original sin in this light: Adam and Eve are substantiated with transgressive action. "You will not die, rather will be like God" - whose name, "I am", refers explicitly to the theme of existence.
In all this, awareness is not an answer. The highest self-awareness does not seem able to turn this doubt. The conscious processing is the means by which we all need to get, so adaptable and efficient, the most appropriate palliative us - work, money, social relations, etc. of the apostolate. Self-awareness is important in understanding what the most appropriate palliative us (and to make a lot of other practical choices!).
But the philosopher's stone here is the discovery that really exist, without any confirmation. Anything that does not do this merely takes the value of confirmation, because the question "Who am I?" (Self-awareness) is even more crucial after the question, "Am I?".
why I say that the myth of self-awareness is another fig leaf placed before the human nakedness, and we think it is not to rise at the end, neither is a good thing in itself, more than they are the ability to coordinate their Moviement or to distinguish subtle differences in sound.
