(September 17, 2015 at 7:38 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(September 17, 2015 at 7:04 am)Captain Scarlet Wrote: Mind is the faculty of consciouness ->
Conciousness is the is the state of being aware of an external objects and oneself (but it is not the state only of self-awareness, otherwise you would be conscious only of your own consciousness) ->
Awareness is gained through sense perception of the enviornment ->
The senses are self authenticating given any attempt to inavlidate them requires their validity ->
Thus as senses detect objective external reality, external objective reality is real. Existence, exists.
Everything I experience is of an objective physical world and its causality (including self-awareness, ideas, etc). The default position is that I do not need to add anything else, ie a world of make-believe where there is only mind, and a mind or minds controlling reality
I don't accept your definitions.
Mind is the arena in which experiences and ideas unfold. Consciousness means that someone is subjectively aware of the process of experience. Whether the "objects" of awareness are internal or external doesn't matter.
Nor does it even matter to the idealistic argument whether those objects ARE external to the self, since nobody here is arguing solipsism. What matters with regards to establishing a default argument is whether they represent more than I experience them as-- specifically whether they are more than ideas with particular forms. How, using your experiences, would you prove that your "objective" world is not, for example, the Mind of God, or the Matrix? One cannot. Therefore, the default position, since my interface with whatever-is-out-there is purely mental, is that whatever-is-out-there is a collection of concepts, ideas, and/or experiences.
And I do not accept your definitions. My definitions are stock understanding of the terms from the English language. I am worried that you are relying too much on equivocation to model and re-model your perspective.
First, human knowledge begins with (sensory) awareness of the external world. It does not begin with awareness of one's own ideas. The reason is that ideas or states of consciousness are necessarily ideas about something, and that something is what one is aware of. One could not become aware of one's own consciousness, unless one first had some states of consciousness to be aware of; and one could not have states of consciousness, unless one first had something else that one was conscious of. Imagine a being who had the ability to create a consciousness
Second, existence has a metaphysical primacy over consciousness: that is, the external world exists prior to, and is not dependent on, our minds. This also implies that the external world has its specific characteristics (identity) prior to, and independent of, the states of our minds. And this is for the same reason: in order to have states of consciousness, there must first be things for us to become conscious of (whereas the converse is not the case), because consciousness is consciousness of things. Consciousness, again, is a faculty of becoming aware of things, not of creating or altering them.
Ergo the primacy of existence is true, the primacy of consciousness is false, our world is objectively real and it cannot be the mind of a god.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.