Just to clarify my views (I like to argue when I'm a bit drunk) and keeping in mind Rasta's thoughts: If a consciousness is the puppet for consciousness then it would be complitely useless and unneeded. That would be hard to accept. There are much more examples where subconsciousness reacts to the plans and expectations of consciusness - when I want to say something and I never exactly don't know how I'm going to do that, but usually it happens smoothly due to sobconscious mechanism. If I want to move my arm, I'm never actually aware of those mechanisms what move my arm. If I want to find a lover, then I'm starting to see beautiful girls in the street
. Anyway it's more healthy to assume some kind of harmony between these two parts of consciousness, Freudian accounts are out of fashion anyway. If there are really scientists who can predicts what I'm gonna do after 6 seconds, then what it proves? Definitely not the nonexistence of the free will. First, one should always be very sceptical about that kind of results, there is so much scientific noise everywhere (if some scientist says that he is 100 percent positive results result regarding something that is biological, then he's definitely wrong, since even hardcore main laws of physics have trouble to achieve that kind of results). There are also some tests when the body reacts to accident before it really has happened - blood pressure arises etc. Animals react in the same way. That doesn't prove the existence of destiny, for example. This probably means that the body is mainly ruled by the subconsciousness, which in turn should be really smart part of the I (soul). It reacts slightly before every action happened. And I don't know how it exactly does all that. Nobody knows, since it's subconsciousnss. When a person is already involved to some kind of troublesome situation or bad choices, then subconsciousnes doesn't cause that situation, but rather starts to prepare actions agains that. But still, I think it's normal to assume that consciousnessis, at least ideally, is adequate enough to rule it's everyday actions, based on it's will (although there may and are several obstacles to it in practice). Otherwise every single action, thought, plan etc would be doubtful, harmful, dangeraous, stupid, etc.. This would be basically crazy, humans couldn't exist in that way. And consciousness should give orders to subconsciousness, that's why it is consciousness that deals with the physical reality. Its will is not "caused" by the subconsiosness for several reason. First of all, as I said, in that case consciousness would be useless. Secondy, if we understand consciousness as something that is conscious, then it would be really hard to understand how something from the "outside" could have influence to it in a way it isn't aware. That wouldn't be consciousness that is something like no-conscious consciousness at the same time, or basically nonsense. The relation between conciousness and non-consciousness is not so much causal but rather the relation of similarity. They essentialy "want" same things (there may be also one of the reason of the success of that scientific experiment), because it's the same soul. But of course, the communication between the parts of consiousnesses may suffer for the several reasons. And for addition, just simply being conscious in everyday sense is not neither religious nor semantic error, nor the matter of belief, but just the only way people are and recognize themselves as being aware of something and being self-conscious at the same time too. No matter how much you observe things in scientific way, you can't find consciousness there, never.
