sentience -> sensation -> amoeba
perception -> percepts -> marmosets
conception -> concepts -> republicans
May I assume that these are inclusive downward? ie, that republicans have sensations? May I assume that organic beings all operate on sensation/precepts/concepts in order to make decisions that might aid in the fight to survive, by making choices that might as easily be arrived at using the precepts of formal logic?
Just to try to be clear about this last question...may I, or may I not assume, that reactions to sensations are capable of providing survival behavior outside the reach of such formal precept-rich environments as grammar, symbolism, or logic?
sentience -> sensation -> amoeba
perception -> percepts -> marmosets
conception -> concepts -> republicans
It is a good outline of how different levels of awareness are generally understood to be distributed. It would certainly not do as an outline of epistemology, however, and I must make a couple of observations:
What an amoeba's awareness is, of course, is purely conjectural, but that fact it responds as a living organism, and not just an inanimate entity, indicates some kind of "awareness."
There is no consciousness of "sensations" themselves. It is not philosophy, but science that supposes the nervous system provides "sensory data" to the brain, but there is no direct consciousness of such data. There is only perceptual consciousness, that is, we are only conscious of "percepts," such as patches of color, the perception of pain, sounds, etc. (The so called, "five senses," are actually a misnomer. We should probably call them the five essential percepts, or something like that.)
Finally, "conception," is not another level of consciousness, as though there were a hierarchy of consciousness. There is only perception. The distinction between that kind of consciousness we call perceptual (marmosets) and the conceptual (humans) is that human conscious, except for the immediate involuntary consciousness by which we perceive existence, is voluntary. That is what is meant by volition. The perceptual consciousness of all other creatures is completely involuntary.
May I assume that these are inclusive downward? ie, that republicans have sensations?
No. As I explained, there is only perceptual consciousness.
May I assume that organic beings all operate on sensation/precepts/concepts in order to make decisions that might aid in the fight to survive,
No. Only human beings make choices. As I explained to D-fendr, "The nature of all other organims provides an automatic pattern of behavior appropriate to the requirements of their nature that guarantees, within the environment and conditions required, the survival of the organism. This automatic pattern of behavior is called instinct." The percepts of all other creatures simply provides the information necessary for their instinctive programs to be carried out.
...by making choices that might as easily be arrived at using the precepts of formal logic?
Again, no. Except within very narrow parameters, if you change an animals environment, it cannot make ajdustment to its behavior that will allow it to survive. It will perish.
It is the conceptual level of consciousness, that is, the reational/volitional mind, that enables human beings to not only change their behavior, but even to change their environment, to achieve whatever is required for them to enjoy their lives.
Just to try to be clear about this last question...may I, or may I not assume, that reactions to sensations are capable of providing survival behavior outside the reach of such formal precept-rich environments as grammar, symbolism, or logic?
I believe I have answered this.
Your questions are concept rich and I hope the paucity of detail in my answers is not failing to answer them completely.
Hank