Clarification…..

Estudia: One question, Philo.

Philo: Sure. What?

Estudia: Well, what about pure consciousness? Like say the idea of god or something. Can’t there be just consciousness and we are all apart of that? And what about God being pure consciousness aware of itself and we are part of that awareness? Isn’t that possible? I mean I’ve heard some people think it is.

Philo: We said that existence exists. That means two things right off the bat. Something exists which you perceive and you exist possessing the means to perceive it, that is, you have consciousness. So if nothing exists there can’t be any consciousness.

Estudia: Why?

Philo: That would be a real contradiction. A consciousness with nothing to be conscious of… come on, you can’t have it both ways. Both nothing and something, no way. It is either something or nothing so that ends that idea.

Estudia: Yea, that’s true. That undermines those pure mystics then. They like to think you can have it both ways. But I see what you are getting at. What about a consciousness conscious of itself?

Philo: That’s a contradiction also. Some good but misguided folks ascribe to what we call the “Primacy of Consciousness” approach. They think that consciousness came first and that makes it primary. This consciousness created that which is. This is not my position as you can see. It would mean that there was or is a consciousness conscious of nothing but itself first of all. How could that be? Before it could know that it existed and be able to identify itself, it has to be conscious of something. So that idea is out. Forget it and keep existence primary.

Estudia: Okay. Ok, I got it, I think. You can’t claim to perceive what doesn’t exist then if you possess consciousness. You or any consciousness has to have something to be aware of first. I like that.

Philo: Good. Exactly. But remember the primacy of consciousness idea is very popular and you’ll be tempted to fall for it from time to time. It has brought a lot of pain and suffering to this biosphere.