Consciousness, What It Is, What It Is Not
(PD) Redon Odilon - Apparition
Copyright ©2025 — August 02, 2025
The Logics Home Page — About The Logics
If an individual is unable to describe a thing from a firsthand point of view, then the individual does not know what the thing is.
Scientists cannot describe consciousness.
Academicians cannot describe consciousness.
No science and no academia is able to describe what consciousness is, neither from a firsthand point of view, nor by any other means.
The scientific method specifically demands observation, and yet no scientist has yet observed their own consciousness. Nevertheless, the descriptions given by scientists might be accurate, that the scientists themselves may only have sensory perceptions, and no consciousness.
Science and academia do not know what consciousness is, nor do science and academia know what emotions, thoughts, dreams, and memories are.
It is very rare for an individual to be capable of intricately describing an object. More rare is for an individual to describe consciousness from a firsthand point of view.
There does indeed exist a detailed firsthand description of consciousness, but the description will never be made public. For as long as the description is kept private, never will scientists be able to copy the description and then claim that they themselves discovered what consciousness is.
The description proves that all science of the mind is imaginary and false.
This article enters into a verifiable firsthand description of how consciousness formed, and how it is applied. The description also illustrates the dramatic intellectual differences between different genres of homo sapiens: sustineo reciproca hyperlogicus and canatim sapientes alogicus. The canatim sapientes alogicus genre — the missing link in evolution — is the hallucinatory nature of science and academia.
Contact us for the full article.