e Book $ 8,54
Print $ 12,33
"You say that consciousness is an enhancement of the senses," CP summarized. "And you mean, it makes no decisions."
"This is a description that is probably foreign to most people."
"Because they project all of the 'freedom of man' into 'consciousness' without examining them in detail."
"You mean, it would ultimately come out that it's just a brain information transmitter?"
Consciousness or normal attention might not interpret the world sufficiently for decisions because this is the brain domain; it does not have the information that was more or less stored.
The brain cannot experience the present clearly enough, it needs this information from the consciousness (the senses) in order to possibly correct its interpretation of the world and decide differently.
It's important to know: Life always also means: experiencing feelings. And that the brain is the memory of the feelings that are connected to the respective Neuron-Network. "
"But why do you need consciousness at all, because the information from the senses could still be stored in the brain without it?"
“The information must first be perceived, experienced. Especially the feelings are eminently important, because they are of paramount importance for controlling people.
As I said: the brain does not perceive. It only builds the world for us according to its goals. This means that attention or awareness is received from this perspective, experienced with the reality that is then available, and transmits the information to the brain.
That is why we need to have attention and, in reinforcement, awareness.
So, the world is not the way we see it, but always the way our brain shows it to us.
This is not clear to many people. For them, the world is the way they (and apparently also) see themselves and others: the same.
As a rule, it is foreign and unimaginable that goals in the brain make the respective world according to our systems, which can only evoke human perspectives. So don't pay any attention to it, stick to your old view.”
There is another obstacle to understanding in the form that is often said that inorganic material, that is, matter, could not produce anything organic.
I would like to say that the first organic compounds were formed billions of years ago from inorganic substances. Over time, this resulted in more and more complex life forms with differentiated functions, including the brain.
Here are not only atoms, etc., but in particular also neurons, synapses, and so on, which control the physical and mental functions of man.
The adaptation pressure of life generates aims. The brain forms neural networks to execute them.
Many people cannot imagine that only aims in the brain control people. They believe they control themselves (with their free will and awareness). They cannot prove this, so it remains with a feeling that it is so and has settled.
So, they cannot perceive that in this case, the aim of their faith (this midpoint) causes it.
And: Not only the perceptions are stored, but, as I said, the resulting feelings. The stronger they are, the more intensively we have experienced them with our consciousness. "
"Consciousness is experienced, the brain reacts, controls and decides," recapitulated CP.
I nodded. "The brain shows us the world because of its aims - the consciousness experiences this world and sends the information to the brain."
"Then, following your argument, the world we see would have to change if those aims have a corresponding value, because they have changed and we then see the world differently!"
"Exactly so it is; we perceive it differently. As a rule, we do not notice this because these changes are natural and consistent for the brain. "
Let me briefly outline the process:
These sequences are constantly repeated. Depending on the value, with normal attention or with enhanced senses (consciousness).
Anyone can understand that in any situation: What you see, for example, is initially done exclusively by the brain. Then we experience it with our senses. What the consciousness then experiences is sent to the brain that processes it. And then, depending on the deviation, it shows the attention a corrected view.
Consciousness or normal attention cannot interpret the present because it does not have the information of the brain. The brain cannot experience, needs this information of consciousness to possibly correct its interpretation of the world."
"Is that the same when someone wakes up in a completely unfamiliar environment?"
"Yes. But the perception of the senses works very quickly - and sends it to the brain so that, when it is important, it adjusts in a flash, accepts this view and takes it into account when making decisions.
The central point of all living things is the preservation of life. This works best by experiencing it. And these, in turn, are important information for the brain that couples and stores it with each event. Without consciousness, one could not experience this because, as I said, the brain alone cannot.
If a similar situation occurs, then the corresponding feelings are activated again.
(The danger here is, if one does not consciously perceive the current situation, that one reacts not to the now, but to the past.)
"It's about attention," CP considered.
I nodded. "Attention" means being at work. 'Awareness' means to intensify your attention. The latter usually occurs much less.
In any case, the consciousness would not be able to conclude judgment without the brain, because the set of factors for it is much too large and variable to make decisions regarding the necessary activities and actions. It would simply be overwhelmed.
It would have to generate and control processes that are constantly taking place in the brain. "
"That would hardly be possible," agreed CP.
“But”, he interjected, “it is sometimes objected that when you operate a machine, you don't have to know its functions down to the last detail. It is enough to press the right buttons. "
"Consciousness would have a lot to do there and should know which actions in the brain are to be activated in each case.
The brain is neither a device nor a machine, nor is it a computer. All of these comparisons are lagging because brains don't work as rigidly as those just mentioned.
The brain is a structure that organizes itself through its goals. In other words, a fabric that works according to organic laws and can change its value at lightning speed if the adaptation makes it necessary.
Therefore these objections make no sense! They are just not properly thought out.
Its follows" I continued: "The brain decides. What one absorbs by means of consciousness through perception, may, depending on the value, possibly influence the decision. Because all information can influence the brain - as long as it is open and flexible.
How far they reach, the brain decides. The better one knows its functions, values and possibilities, the more influence one can take over the SELF and the will (which both are also in the brain). "
"So, 'know yourself'?"
"Know your psyche."
Whoever observes himself, when he consciously picks up something, will find that his senses are strongly activated. Much stronger than if it's just about general attention.
You absorb life with your senses, and when something special happens, for example, something interesting, dangerous, emotionally moving, then you take it intensively with his consciousness.
If a person deals with a specific topic, then he needs targeted information. This should provide the consciousness. 'Being conscious' means, as I said, receiving information, which is then passed on to the brain. "
"So, the aim formed in each case focuses on the topic, and consciousness provides the brain with more precise facts through intensive perception," concluded CP.
"For example, thinking," I explained, "because of a stimulus or a question, consciousness seeks information in the outside world and immediately sends each one to the brain. This looks for experiences or similarities. These intermediate results become conscious again, etc. The interplay goes on until you have a coherent feeling or cannot get any further. The end product of thinking is formulated by the brain and becomes aware only fractions of a second or later. "
CP considered. "What comes out, is so decided or formulated by the brain?"
"Yes, from a midpoint that makes the final decision and excludes all other non-relevant neural networks.
The reason that man believes that he has decided with his consciousness lies in the very short period of time - often only milliseconds - between the decision of the brain and the awareness.
Concerning important issues, there is always an interplay between the brain and consciousness, because the brain has only a limited amount of up-to-date information and relies on consciousness as an enhancer of the senses to possibly add new facts. "
"Only the most important things become so conscious?"
"Who decides what is important?"
"The aims with their midpoints."
"There are actually people who say you do everything with your consciousness," CP now interposed.
"It's incredible what it's supposed to mean," I said. “Once you look through the definitions, you read: knowing certain facts, remembering certain events, sum of beliefs and points of view,
And related words for consciousness should be: intelligence, memory, conviction.
The consciousness should also have complete access to the brain, "read out" the relevant data there and evaluate this data in order to be able to make a decision. After the decision, he would have to intervene again in the neural networks of the brain, for example to start movements that are necessary to carry out the action he has chosen."
All of this applies exactly to the brain. But if you check the consciousness once, what it represents, you search in vain. Because it is not designed to carry this around with it and it cannot do it at all.”
"People say that they control themselves, with their consciousness, because they do not observe themselves, because these views are taken for granted. They just babble, out of habit, what other people say or what they have learned. It also means using the word consciousness unreflected.
“So people say that they control themselves with their consciousness, because they are not observing themselves closely, because they take these views for granted. They just parrot out of habit what other people say or what they have learned. This also includes using the word awareness without reflection. "
"That hits the nail on the head," I confirmed.
"They just take it that way."
"Yes, because they either have not heard the statement that man is a purpose-led being or did not want to hear it. Accordingly, they do not investigate in this respect.
A major obstacle, as we said, is that they cannot or do not properly classify the role of consciousness. That, too, is the reason in the past and in the still-to-hear opinions that consciousness is something only human beings have, and that they control themselves with it."
--- Expansion of consciousness ---
By the way: Even the term, consciousness expansion 'comes from this attitude. Without being clear about it, they say: The strengthened senses should absorb more information than usual (which would probably not be wrong). "
"People who use this word," remarked CP, "probably mean a kind of spiritual, metaphysical experience."
"For sure. If you create such a goal in yourself, then a midpoint will form that gives you this feeling. Of course, this only happens in their brains.
"The experiments of Libet and others (scientific writings by Benjamin Libet 1983, Keller and Heckhausen 1990, Haggard and Eimer 1999, Miller and Trevena 2002) clearly show that, before a person made a conscious decision, the brain does this decision has already been made.
So, you cannot deny that the brain is deciding and not consciousness.
One particular difficulty was that in earlier times it could not be precisely defined: Consciousness was something that was
not found in the brain but, as people said, controls one's actions.
Because the belief in supersensible, in this case a 'consciousness-spirit being' was widespread.
They took consciousness as a metaphysical spirit, similar to the spirit of God, without questioning it further.
The fact that the brain decides has been clearly demonstrated by the above experiments. The so-called "freedom of consciousness" has never been proven. "
"But why do educated people still hold to their version today, that this decides everything, firmly?"
“It fits in well with their view of the world and has always been regarded as a source of knowledge and decision-making. One was and is certain that the entire true world could be recognized with it.
The brain used to tell you that the world was clear - in order to be able to deal with it well - and that it could be perceived and recognized by humans with their consciousness. Of course, this lifted humans far beyond animals. This belief has been over since the emergence of the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics and their experimental confirmation: the world is neither unambiguous nor the same from every perspective. But what has remained in many people is the idea of the consciousness that makes the decision, because this, following their logic, recognizes everything. This logic of course excludes the brain - as a decision maker.
Consciousness is, so to speak, an important interface between the brain and the outside world”, I explained. "Only with his senses - and it is indeed an enhancement of the senses - is it possible for the brain to get targeted information from outside and, of course, from within."
"So, if something is important, then the senses are reinforced and awareness comes into play," repeated CP.
"Imagine that you have the goal of making an important decision, of choosing or pronouncing judgment on the basis of relevant facts, and that you should do all this in your own sequence only with your consciousness, without the interplay of consciousness and brain.
Or let's take the language, it runs automatically. One has learned how to speak, articulate and so on. An experienced speaker, of course, does not focus on the individual points of the language, but the focus is on the topic at stake.
The speaking, the gestures, the facial expressions that one makes, all this has been learned in the course of life and is, if one speaks, expressed. Consciousness has nothing to do with it, unless you behave wrong, make mistakes, then it usually becomes active immediately and delivers appropriate information to the brain. This then attempts to bring about a correction or change in behaviour.
Imagine, you have to choose all your words only with your consciousness. For example, at a party. And now ask yourself what you are really aware of. That means: how to use your movements, how you speak, facial expressions, etc. "
"That's really impossible, you need the learned routines from the brain," CP agreed.
"Yes, the respective midpoints."
"You say only the relatively most important things come to your consciousness. But how is it when I am busy with an important topic and concentrate on it. Suddenly, something comes to my consciousness that has nothing to do with the current midpoint? "
"Well, the brain jumped from one midpoint to another because it took the attention or because the previous one might just go
by itself and no longer need consciousness. Or the other midpoint seemed more important to the brain at the moment, because a question that had been in one for a long time could now be answered.
This often happens with creative people. Or maybe they just aroused interest on some topic.
Incidentally, this reminds me that if you did not finish something you just wanted because you forgot it, then it helps to
ask, 'What was my goal right now?'"
"You mean, one has then jumped to a different midpoint and is less shaped by the previous one?"
I nodded. “It's like priming.
"And in general: A very strong concentration is only possible for a limited time, because at a certain point, physiologically, it wears off."
"And otherwise you live without consciousness?" asked CP. "If everything works and no new facts are added?"
I laughed. "Most of the time, everything actually goes off automatically, the consciousness is almost in the standby state
during this time, but is immediately active again when something important occurs. Usually, this is far less the case than you should think. In addition, the brain learns, and the new usually
quickly becomes routine, so that the consciousness is then no longer needed in this intensity.
If you observe yourself, you will be able to confirm this. In everyday life, you don't usually come across something exciting new or important events.
"Consciousness always becomes active with intense attention when something is very important," CP repeated.
"Yes. Depending on what the attention is focused on, this gets a value that can shape or, in other words, structure man. This is the normal attention. If something is particularly important, then one speaks of a conscious recording.
Also, at the risk of repeating myself: the purpose is to provide these strong information to the targets in the brain so that they can immediately absorb them and respond accordingly. So, consciousness is always an enhancement of the senses. "
"So, is attention and consciousness each providing information to the brain?"
"Yes, the difference is in the different valence."
"Consciousness is not active that often."
"If you observe yourself, you will be able to confirm this. In everyday life you do not usually encounter something exciting new or important events.
But here one should differentiate: Adolescents and especially children have more awareness than adults. Consciousness in the sense of increased perception. Because the world is still new and they are gathering their experiences. But that does not necessarily mean that its perception corresponds to the facts. Conversely, it seems that the older you are, the less you usually integrate in yourself. Experience shows that neuronal plasticity is limited. However, this is less the case for areas that have interested people for life. Many midpoints have become firmer over the years, but also more rigid, and unfortunately often exclude new things that seemingly do not suit them with the midpoint- mechanics.
Awareness awakens or generates midpoints because of important values in the brain when they are particularly touched. For example: survival, new orientation, social recognition.
Is it overwhelmed or bored, then one comes to dreams.
However, the moment you leave your habitual environment, for example, the attention or consciousness becomes more active. Because new facts or impressions are important to the brain to orient itself. Movements and pictures are preferably consciously perceived. "
"What mechanism may be behind this if you're stuck with a topic, even though you think you know the solution?" CP asked.
"It's a midpoint that blocks. For example, one has gotten bogged, and in this impasse the thoughts circle. The same mechanism works when one is ruled by anger. Generally speaking, whenever there is a midpoint that severely restricts others. "
"That reminds me," CP said, "if you've slept on it, the solution often comes to mind the next day."
"That's because the blocking midpoint has lost value or dissolved in the meantime. We have found a distance. In sleep, amongst others the brain has the task to integrate the experiences of the day's events, to learn, and possibly to create a different view through restructuring. For this, the brain prefers to use the creativity that the midpoints of the day's events can not interfere with.”
"You see things in a different light," thought CP.
"Yes, the attitude changes. In other words, the other midpoints associated with this topic have been re-evaluated or others have been added. Unless this dead-end midpoint acts in the same form. Then you have a complex, so to speak.
Incidentally, we all know that the brain can be wrong. Therefore, one should sleep one night before deciding something important. "
--- complexes ---
"Explain complex please again."
"It's a midpoint, a neural network that's unable to adapt and offers strong resistance to change attempts."
"He has encapsulated?"
"Yes, in contrast to the flexible midpoints that can always learn.
"Or to the clusters. These are neural networks that carry out innate or learned processes and are adaptable - such as the toddler's search for the mother's breast, running or tying shoes. "
"A cluster is therefore a midpoint, which is responsible among other things for routines, such as movements, recurring actions, learned reactions. Can you give a graphic example? "CP asked.
"Well, about a tic - a short and uncontrollable motor contraction of individual muscles in the face - is a complex. By contrast, normal facial expressions are a cluster. "
"There are, as you said, many clusters in one - skills, learned procedures, behaviours, attitudes, etc.
Can one say: complex means enclosed? "
"Yes, he surrounds himself with walls. His goal is to maintain certain attitudes, postures, reflexes under all circumstances,
and to influence other midpoints with his peculiarity of maintaining what he has once learned in a particular situation."
There are also among others Life-Complex, Descendants-Complex, Leader-Complex. These lie entirely in the depths of the human being. This is how he is born and they practically cannot be
►Life-Complex is the impetus to live as long as you can, regardless of the circumstances.
► Descendants-Complex is the driving force behind producing offspring, regardless of the environmental conditions.
► Leader-Complex is the devotion to someone who is assigned special skills and whom you trust to the point of blindness.
As with all complexes, there is a risk of not adapting to the changed circumstances. "
"That is," CP considered, "it is rigid and does not act like other midpoints that are flexible and play in concert with the goals of the brain."
"Yes, he does not act like the clusters, does not learn and thus disturbs the flexibility, the adaptation of the brain. This is of course unfavourable. The outside world is constantly changing. The central point of life in general and the resulting requirement should be that man adapts to these changes.
"This is quite common," commented CP.
--- worldview ---
"I have another question," he continued. "Apart from the obviously irrefutable fact that everything consists of substances that work according to the law: how could you explain that there are people who believe their view is the only true one in the world? "
"You can see that very clearly in extremists, fanatics, devout believers, people who are nailed up," I nodded.
"But also, the other 'normal' people have fixed midpoints. These are their anchors, their reference points, from which they act and evaluate the world.
Anyone who realizes that their perspective is just one of many is less in danger of being torn away from the ground by the abandonment of a midpoint.
Unfortunately, here as well, the midpoints act to diminish everything else that does not support them.
Many people refuse to give up a midpoint, even if it dawns on them that it is harmful to them. Partly because they are afraid of losing their grip.
This fear is more justified for extremists and strict believers than for other people, because they are only made special from one or a few midpoints. This is how their world could actually fall apart.
However, the more midpoints that can play in a person flexibly and communicate with each other, the less he will risk them here. "
"Because other midpoints can intercept the inner system?"
"Yes, especially if you have not focused only on a few midpoints in your life, but inwardly rich and diverse."
"You mean, if you focus not only on his family, on a beloved person, on whom you are fixated, the profession, his hobby, etc. You can be endangered by these midpoints so, if you are completely absorbed in it, in the long run nothing else sees. "
"I think so."
"So, you do not have to give up your special midpoints?" CP asked.
"You do not need that. But one thing to watch out for is that the midpoints you love will eventually get a place in one that guarantees that others will retain their value more or less. "
"Well, that a midpoint does not become a dominant ruler."
"Yes, that's important for inner harmony."
"That reminds me of complexes we just talked about."
"Midpoints that master everything are complexes."
"So, you should try to change or dissolve them," I suggested.
"That's usually difficult. If you have recognized a complex and tried to work on it, then this meets with considerable resistance. "
"What options are there?"
"You can divide the psyche of man, that is, the midpoints in the brain, into accessible and difficult to access.
If a complex disrupts healthy behaviour and you cannot change it yourself, it is the task of a therapist, for example, to provide access to this complex in order to change or resolve it
The work of the brain is usually unconscious. It becomes aware when certain thresholds are exceeded. So, when something important is in the foreground, awareness comes into action to provide information to the midpoints involved through more intense awareness. "
"And this information does not take the encapsulated complex?"
"These can be very resistant to change.
But a complex need not necessarily be aware of, so you can change it. It is often enough, if it is a learned behaviour, this again unlearn.
The method, such as the fear of crossing large squares, is to cross very small squares first, which can become larger if the client feels less anxious.
For others, it makes more sense to look for the reason why he has formed. This can potentially provide access when the mind stimulates a new midpoint that can bring about change. "
"You mean," said CP, "the one was learned and could be unlearned again. The other has formed at some point in a lifetime and could be worked through by rediscovering or raising awareness. "
"In all cases, it's about forming a new midpoint, which is increasingly reinforced by emotions and counterbalances the complex midpoint that narrows, oppresses or torments people."
"And what about the mind or the reason?"
"These can say x-times, 'It's nonsense, what you do or think.'
As long as you do not convince the feeling, it will hardly do any good. "
--- Feelings ---
"How about the feelings when they become aware?" CP jumped to the next topic.
"Emotions are powerful controls in humans," I explained. "They arise among other things by achieving or not achieving goals.
Achieving it reinforces the path that one had taken to reach the goal in a similar situation. If a goal is not achieved, negative feelings are triggered, which are intended to dissuade you from taking the same path in the future. At the same time, they are more or less pushing to continue pursuing the goal.
Consciousness passes this information on to the brain's targets so that they can be processed by their networks. The stronger feelings for something, the more the human being gets in this midpoint. "
"Because this midpoint is reinforced by consciousness?"
"Yes, when we, for example, hear music.
Here the qualia-problem of the philosophers is often addressed.
Qualia means quality, quality means value. The quality of a value results from the feelings that a person feels. "
"Qualia means emotional."
"Yes, man is receptive to music because it creates feelings in him. The more beautiful these are, the more value they have for him. "
"That's how the value of music comes from the feelings you feel," said CP. "That's nothing new."
I nodded. "That these feelings are triggered by a midpoint is something new.
Many philosophers do not understand this, because the midpoint mechanics are unknown to them. They say that while the brain can perceive all sorts of stimuli, it does not explain the enjoyment of the music we feel.
I say that this enjoyment comes from the midpoint in which I am when I hear music. Of course, this network of neurons not only absorbs the stimuli, but also wholeheartedly arouses feelings that arise in connection with this music. "
"The better you feel music, the more beautiful your feelings are," added CP.
"Yes, of course, the reverse is true: the worse the music, the less positive feelings will unfold."
"And if someone is completely unmusical?"
"Then he feels next to nothing in this respect."
"The extent to which a Qualia can develop depends on the people who receive it," CP concluded. "The quality is thus determined reciprocally: once from a midpoint of the receiver, on the other by the quality of the transmitter."
I nodded again. "To feel holistic often means to feel a similarity. This can be seen very well in the music: You can recognize a melody that has been stored in memory, even if it is played with other instruments. Unless the instruments do not hit the tone, that is the essence of this melody. "
"Why have many philosophers for more than 200 years had difficulty understanding this simple mechanism?" asked CP.
"Because they did not know about midpoint mechanics, so they did not have that key to the brain, they thought of consciousness as something not ultimately comprehensible, and because feelings in their subjects were often just a minor matter. This applies especially to the followers of the philosopher Kant, who portrayed the feelings as 'opponents of reason.'
Of course, feelings have a very high value for humans - not only in the negative, but of course in a positive sense. They are strong helpers of the goals - the midpoints. They help steer people and are not always unreasonable. What would a person be without feelings? "
"Philosophers can come to strange conclusions," CP shook his head.
I weakened it a little with my motto: "What happened, had to happen as it happened."
--- control ---
"Why is consciousness so important to many people?" He asked again.
"Because they often think they would decide everything. They need it for the feeling that they can decide absolutely freely. It is not clear to them that the goals of the brain have decided in them.
They probably don't want to recognize that either, because they fear that they will no longer have control over themselves. "
“But do people have control over themselves at all? After all that you have said, the brain is infinitely diverse and decides holistically through the goals. "
"Control means being able to steer something. This then proceeds so that the consciousness gives information to the brain that e.g. something is wrong. The brain then tries to correct this incoherent, if it does not actually fit the goals of the brain.
To have complete control over yourself would be to be able to govern all goals. Alone because of their multitude, this would be impossible. And even more impossible would be to control all interactions between the goals that influence and change each other. In addition, there are many midpoints that have some strength, and cannot simply be governed by the I, such as the life instinct.
Many people are subject to this illusion of control and believe that they can control processes with consciousness that are demonstrably uncontrollable.
"And certainly not from consciousness," added GP.
"The more important a decision is, the more aware it becomes," I repeated again. "So, as people become aware of these choices every time, they believe that they are self-conscious.
Moreover, until the 18th century, people knew little about the brain. That changed in the 19th and especially in the 20th century, when the triumph of the computer began. This created non-invasive methods such as:
MRI (magnetic resonance imaging),
fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging),
PET (positron emission tomography)
and CT (computed tomography).
These procedures allow insight into the brain, providing facts that were previously unknown.
But the old conceptions of consciousness that have been taught for thousands of years are still in people's minds today and are difficult to change. "
--- conviction ---
"I have a question about criminal acts," CP said. "The judiciary assumes that man are responsible for his actions."
"If someone commits an act, then he is in focus of the aim during this period, and it is usually not possible for the perpetrator to stop: the aim structures people, it wants to be fulfilled."
"Can't consciousness experience the effects once the brain made the decision?"
“Of course it does - but from the point of view of the brain’s aims that are prevailing right now. It's just an informant. "
"Are the goals more important than awareness?"
“Goals have the power to make decisions. - Consciousness only provides data, does not decide. "
"So, man should pay attention to his goals."
"Especially when it are wrong goals. Man can try to weaken them (by forming the goal not to give in to them) or to change them (build a counter goal).
"It's really strange that the brain (the midpoints) decides and we don't notice it and believe that it was the consciousness."
"This is exactly what the judges believe because they assume that awareness and will are free and could have stopped the crime."
--- freedom --
For a moment it was quiet between us. Then CP continued, "Can one say: Everyone knows he has consciousness, but hardly anyone has been able to define it yet?"
I nodded. "Consciousness is intense perception with its senses - more precisely, concentrated perception, holistic or in detail.
Consciousness is also about the issue of man's spiritual freedom. If it turns out that everything runs according to substances and laws, then everything would be predetermined, then man would have quasi no freedom and the free will would not be there then - from the legal and philosophical point of view."
"And - is that right?" asked CP.
"The will is of course still there and plays a central role in the life of man. Will means to form a particularly strong aims for the SELF.
And human freedom would continue - because he does not know everything. And who does not know everything, is forced to make decisions. This ignorance is his freedom, which man will not lose because he can never know everything.
But consciousness and free will in the previous sense would have to be given up.
And in the end, the fact is that everything is made up of substances that run according to laws and, as a result, everything is predetermined. "
"You do not mean the freedom that comes from nowhere, but the freedom of the possibilities one has. Is that ultimately freedom? "asked CP.
"It's a quasi-freedom," I answered. It is definitely a mistake to believe that there is a freedom that comes from nothing or an incomprehensible mind. "
--- ego, it, superego ---
CP considered and then said: "There are also a lot of theories about the psyche of man."
"You could say so. I would like to give an example: You can divide the psyche, that is, the totality of the midpoints in the human, which have neuronal networks. For example, in ego, it, superego, as Sigmund Freud did.
However, this is problematic and does not hit the core of reality. This is that the brain (which includes, among other things, the so-called belly brain) is a dynamic system in which the midpoints all communicate with each other more or less - and depending on the subject.
It can be said that the consciousness only provides information to the brain, which it has absorbed through intense perception, and then more or less processed by the respective midpoints - which was not previously known. The SELF is represented with its goals and midpoints in the brain and these maybe regulate and intervene in the processes of the psyche.
It can be said that what one is unconscious of involves much more than these three areas, namely, among other things, procedures, communication attitudes, adaptation to the respective environment, etc.
It is also not the case that this must necessarily remain unconscious, but all these actions become conscious when they exceed a certain threshold value.
One can say that morality is stored in goals, as well as social norms, etc. Conscience is a feeling that is triggered by judgments of good or evil that are also generated by goals. "