Philosophy and Art

What is a “subconscious thought” (according to you)?

…something that sets parameters for us to operate in, and instinct would come under those innate parameters.

Does a thought not always be a conscious one (according to you)?

Ur-thoughts are conscious too. All thoughts are conscious. Even if they are in contact with instincts: Thoughts are always conscious.


In a different sense, unrelated to art, a great deal of thinking and the associated “thoughts” are not conscious (unless you are defining thoughts as only the conscious thoughts). A great deal of cognition is subconscious deducing, predicting, and presuming and often very complex thoughts, difficult to express in spoken language.

Being conscious of your thoughts can mean many different things but in most cases what people mean when they speak of conscious thoughts is words i.e. thoughts expressed in language.

Thoughts express themselves through actions – all kind of actions. They express themselves through verbal actions but they also express themselves through non-verbal actions. In fact, their expression through non-verbal actions, I will argue, is their most significant form of expression.

Being conscious or unconscious of something simply means being aware or unaware of that something. And if that something refers to your thoughts then what it means is being aware or unaware of your thoughts. Your thoughts manifest through your actions and you can be aware or unaware of your actions, and if you are aware of them, you can be aware or unware of what kind of thoughts direct them.

I performed who-knows-how-many actions in the past. Some of these actions I was aware of and I am still aware of. Some of these actions I was aware of but I am no longer aware of (I forgot them.) And some of these actions I was never aware of. Of those actions I am still aware of some of them are processed by my brain which means I have an insight into what kind of thoughts directed them.

The purpose of thinking is prediction.
The purpose of prediction is to prevent what is unwanted from happening.

I define “thoughts” as “concsious thoughts”. So to me, “unsonscious thoughts” don’t exist at all, and something like “subconscious thoughts” should not be called “thoughts” or just “subconscious thoughts” or “preconscious thoughts”.

I understand. Would you agree that “conscious thought” is nothing other than “imaginary speech”? Personally, I think that in a lot of situations these “conscious thoughts” hinder thinking. We talk in order to communicate. When there is no reason to communicate, there is no reason to be “conscious of your thoughts”. Because, when you’re “conscious of your thoughts”, what you are really doing is you are imagining yourself sharing your inclinations with others. And when there is no reason to do so, it’s a waste of energy. The goal does not require it. We do it merely because we are used to doing it. Because we are used to talking. We don’t do it because it is necessary. Imagine yourself in the wild having these “conscious thoughts” before deciding how to go about hunting your prey. It’s excessive. It does not help you in any way. It’s pointless because there is noone to listen to you. The more efficient approach would be to keep your mind silent. By forcing it to stop talking you force it to focus its attention on what matters. In fact, you force it to think more and to act only when it is necessary to act. But then, it appears that according to you, such a person, relying mostly on his intuition to make decisions, does not think. Apparently, because his thinking process is opaque. He is not aware how he thinks, so he must not be thinking.

A strategist never shares his most conscious thoughts.
A philosopher must he a strategist.

This site shows why.

So if not thoughts and thinking, when you are on autopilot driving through typical city traffic while your mind drifts away onto distant day-dreams, what do you want to call that calculating, predicting, strategizing, and so on??

Didn’t we have a discussion about this autopilot mode years ago? I can’t recall the thread.

Possibly. I can’t remember the discussion.

But the spoken language can and does express those very complex thoughts.

Those so-called “strategists” are liars and fakers; so by “strategizing” they just mean “lying” and “faking”.

We do not only talk in order to communicate, but also in order to e.g. get power … and so on. So, communication can also be something like a lie, a fake, a mask, an excuse … and so on and so forth.

Imagine yourself on a philosophy forum (if there is a real one at all :wink: ) having no “thoughts”.

That’s irrelevant.

Maybe for you, but not for me.

Communication is not only used, but also misused, especially for power, control. And that is absolutely relevant for all living beings.

So, ILP is an example too. The misuse of communication can be find in each ILP thread.

The point is that there is such a thing as “subconscious thoughts” whether you agree with it or not and whether you think that statement is a language abuse or not. Everyone can understand that statement pretty easily except for the paranoid few who see deception everywhere. Thoughts are necessarily conscious blah blah blah and yet we all know that we also make intelligent decisions unconsciously. Apparently, these aren’t thoughts. If you don’t talk you are not thinking. There is no thinking without talking. “Talking is everything”, says the herd animal. It’s become a habit to scream “language abuse” and “language games” whenever someone cannot understand what others are saying. It’s a very convenient way to save oneself the trouble of trying to understand what others are saying. Just fixate on what is superficial and never ever pay attention to what is hiding beneath the surface.

Talking is langugae, regardless whether you agree or not.