RE: virus: Level 0 (formerly: is Clinton level 3)

Schneider John (
Wed, 4 Dec 1996 04:42:03 -0500

Kenneth Boyd wrote:
> 2) Of course it's confusing! Having experienced 'believing that
> I believe something without actually believing it', I regret to
> say that it *is* possible.

I haven't experienced this.... (I don't think so, anyway...)

> The problem is that one's metaknowledge can be subject to
> inaccuracy as well.

My meta-belief is that there are no absolute truths, which
passes as my only pseudo-absolute-truth. Given this 'belief',
then, I have no other beliefs. Would it be the case if I, in
the future, have a 'religious experience', and start to believe
in God, that what I am currently doing is 'believing that I
believe something even though I don't believe it'? (I'm just
trying to understand the concept via example here.)

Eva wrote:
> Yup. And one's conscious mind can be going in one direction,
> and thinking one thing, while one's unconscious can be working
> in another direction with purposes that are opaque to the
> conscious mind and contrary to its goals and stated beliefs.

This sounds to me like a theory of the relationship between the
conscious and unconscious mind. In order for it to be proven
'true', one would need to become consciously aware of the
unconscious mind, in order to consciously know which way it's
going... but if one is consciously aware of the unconscious,
well, then the unconscious is no longer unconscious... this
leads me to think we're just working with a different level
of consciousness, but not at the level of UNconsciousness,
which is, by definition, outside of consciousness.