Ego loss is not ego loss.

This x2

 

Try reading the words and not the implications.

neither state (coma or blackout) equate to an inability to recognize perception (as that is self-awareness).

The recognition of perception is not synonymous with physical OR cognitive function, and they are separate processes neurologically.

 

cog·ni·tive   /ˈkɒgnɪtɪv/ Show Spelled[kog-ni-tiv] Show IPA
adjective
1.of or pertaining to cognition.
2.of or pertaining to the mental processes of perception, memory, judgment, and reasoning, as contrasted with emotional and volitional processes.

Recognizing that someone is talking to you, then processing what was said to be able to recognize the object being asked for and respond is without question a recognition of perception and a recognition one does not possess in a coma.

 

Cognitive is an adjective, of or pertaining to the mental processes.


Cognition, the noun, is defined as follows:
1. The mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses.
2. A result of this; a perception, sensation, or intuition.

Cognition itself is not the recognition of perception.

 

Pretty shady trying to short the definition there.

Well you used cognitive, not I so are you arguing with yourself?

It does appear regardless of which word we are defining, that one is in fact heavily reliant on the other.

 

Porkstock is probably right in that alot of this stuff seems heavy on semantics and alot of unwaivering viewpoints.

In regards to Walsh's op, I've concluded I completely understand the point you are making but I also understand the concept of ego loss and have had psychedelic experiences with Salvia Divinorum and DMT in particular but other psychedelics as well where it would be pretty difficult for me to argue much of an sense of self identity (ego) was left intact during the trip.

It seems to me Walsh that you view the ego loss as more of a black and white thing as where possibly I view the concept more on a spectrum and certain mental states whether it be natural or drug induced significantly bring down the mental wall (which is easier just stated as a loss) of ego.

 

Do you really not understand that recognizing that you are perceiving something is not the same as perceiving it??
That seems elementary to me.

 

The ego is the sense of self, not the self itself.

The closest analogy I can think of would be like saying "hearing is not the ear" or "seeing is not the eye". Ego is not awareness, it is merely a function of awareness.

Edit: I wrote that in response after reading the OP, but upon further inspection I find that the thread has degenerated into dictionary definitions, so I guess the discussion is already over.