thinking is not all there is to conscious experience I can't grasp why the clause "thinking is not all there is to conscious experience" is composed in this way. Why "is" is used twice in the last clause of the last sentence? Why the preposition "to" is used in "is to conscious experience"? We don't only think about things. We also experience them directly through our senses. We are capable of directly sensing and responding to things like tulips, cars, and a cold wind. And we can be aware of ourselves experiencing. We have intuitions about things and feelings. We know things not only with the head, but also with the heart and with the senses. Furthermore, we can be aware of ourselves thinking; thinking is not all there is to conscious experience.
Sep 29, 2018 7:33 PM
Answers · 4
"Is to" means "belongs to". Думать не всё что принадлежит сознательому опыту.
September 29, 2018
'all there is to' means 'the sum total of'. All there is to my life is sleep and work, which simply means that my life consists of sleep, work and nothing else. All there is to politics is money and lies. If thinking were all there was to conscious experience, that would mean that conscious experience consisted of thinking and nothing else.
September 29, 2018
Let's simplify it to "Thinking is not all there is to conscious experience." First, "to" sometimes can make the abstract relationship between two things more subtle and natural. If you use [in] or "[of] conscious experience", it necessarily makes it appear like thinking belongs to the experience as an integral part of it, which the speaker might not want to imply. For instance, it might be because he wants to leave the possibility open that thinking may be the experience itself, without any simplistic possessive or hierarchical relationship. It is not specific as "in" or "of", and this may serve some purpose. As for the structure, you might approach it in simple steps. 1. There are thinking and other things to conscious experience. 2. All there is to conscious experience = noun phrase that makes the predicative part a relative clause. 3. [Thinking] IS NOT [all there is to conscious experience]. "all" leads a noun phrase, like "all [that there is to ...]". It's saying "thinking" is not what this phrase represents. Essentially, you need to familiarize yourself with phrases like "all there is", "all it is", "what there is", "the thing it is", and so on. For an extreme looking example, consider "All it is is just a gimmick". Because "all it is" acts as a noun, the repeated "is" is not strange at all. And here's another: [All there was] was some junk food = [All that was there] was some junk food.
September 29, 2018
Because *is* and *there is* are different verbs And the sentence is basically saying that "thinking is not the only thing that you need (maybe) to have a consciouss experience"
September 29, 2018
Still haven’t found your answers?
Write down your questions and let the native speakers help you!