Saturday, 13 April 2013

The Wavicle

" '...Haertel proved that there is only one fundamental particle...'" (James Blish, The Quincunx Of Time, New York, 1983, p. 60).

And, in Blish, Midsummer Century (London, 1975), there is only one wavicle with many aspects and with a "...psychology..." based on not thought but willed behavior (p. 22).

Does it make sense to speak of will without thought? In my opinion, the most basic term in philosophy of mind is not "thought" but "consciousness," although the latter term is not used in the Midsummer Century discussion summarized here.

It does make sense to speak of unconscious motivations but only within conscious beings. We do not say that the wind is unconsciously motivated to blow around the Earth.

Consciousness without any thought would be mere immediate sensation. But an immediate sensation that was unaccompanied by memory of any previous sensations would be instantaneous, thus, I think, unconscious. Since to remember a sensation is to think, "I sensed that before...," it is arguable that some fundamental level of thought is necessary for any consciousness. However, the Qvant in Midsummer Century does not say whether consciousness accompanies the will of the wavicle and, if anything, implies otherwise, although he also states that the origin of inner space is explicable in terms of the psychology of the wavicle and that power from the source is tapped by meditation.

No comments:

Post a Comment