O Consciousness, Consciousness, Wherefore Art Thou Consciousness? [A Philosophical Argument on the Nature of Consciousness]
Every experience we have is transmitted as first-person and is only accessible through self-reflection.
The nature of consciousness has always been an extremely prominent topic of discussion within the philosophical and esoteric circles. David Chalmers, a modern philosopher, has coined the term, "the Hard Problem", in reference to the question what is consciousness? A physical brain gives rise to a seemingly intangible expression of reality, but how?
Descartes proposed the body-mind duality, stating that the body was physical and that the mind was immaterial. Descartes stated that the body was similar to that of a machine, with moving parts and working systems governed by the laws of physics and nature; where a machine possesses no thoughts or feelings, neither does the body. The soul, he argued, was capable of producing thoughts and feelings, that the entirety of experience was held within the soul.
Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia, whom Descartes was in frequent correspondence with, presented in a letter to Descartes the problem with his argument. The problem was that there seemed to be difficulty in explaining how a nonphysical mind could interact with a physical body.
Descartes responded assuring the princess that the matter was much too complicated and not to spend much time worrying about it.
So what is consciousness?
To begin, let us start with a basic definition:
con·scious·ness
ˈkän(t)SHəsnəs/Submit
noun
- the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings.
"she failed to regain consciousness and died two days later"
- the awareness or perception of something by a person.
plural noun: consciousnesses
"her acute consciousness of Mike's presence"
Using this understanding, then, consciousness is any level of awareness. Up until recently, mainstream philosophy has argued vehemently that humans are the only entities which possess consciousness. I would argue that religion has influenced our understanding of consciousness so extremely that it has limited our basic understanding of awareness. However, I digress, there are religions and philosophers which have argued in favor of panpsychism.
Panpsychism is the idea that consciousness is found everywhere within everything.
As I mentioned before in, "On the Nature of Free-Will", Thomas Nigel's, "What is it like to be a Bat?", it is outside of our limited scope of experience and understanding to ever be capable of knowing what the subjective experience of any other entity could be like. However, modern science has begun to show that even plants exhibit some form of consciousness.
If plants too are aware of their surroundings, then why are we so hard pressed to accept that plants and other animals are conscious?
One argument against the theory that plants and animals are conscious is that their level of awareness does not match that of the higher cognitive functions of our brains and those of a select few high brain animals. Plants and animals do not possess a nervous system like ours, and have not developed the sensory organs required to experience consciousness. Philosophers argue that plants and primal brains are working on simple action::reaction, in that they are not actually aware of their environment. The flaw with this lays beyond the implied rebuttal of Thomas Nigel, but rather in the construct of my argument against free-will.
Humans are not immune to the stimulus action::reaction catalyst of experience, and working off of the previous argument, then it would follow that neither are humans actually aware of their environment.
However, it is of my opinion that humans are aware of their environment, being capable of acting upon it is another argument. Therefore, all living things are conscious.
Now here is where I begin to lose a lot of people...
Panpsychism attempts to show that conscious is the prevailing energy that gives foundation to the existence of reality. The nature of reality is consciousness.
Before I may continue, a little quantum mechanics needs to be understood. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the double slit experiment, please watch this following clip that explains the test and the results extremely clearly:
When a single electron is fired through the double slit it continues to create the same interference pattern as it would with a steady stream. Each electron must have awareness of each and every electron's position before it and each and every electron's position after it in order to properly continue creating the interference pattern.
The electrons not only have some level of awareness, but it would appear as though they have an almost omniscient memory being able to accurately recall the past and future before acting itself in the present.
When the measuring device is placed in line with the electrons, the electrons stop behaving as a wave function and collapse into an observable form, choosing either the left or the right slit to create the double slit results of solid particles. Two implications can be made from this observation. First, here stands more evidence that even electrons bear some basic level of consciousness as they were aware they were being measured. Secondly, these results provide evidence for the foundations of the idea that we create our realities through our thoughts and observations.
The double-slit experiment gives us a rather strong argument that electrons are conscious, and if electrons are conscious then what does that say about reality? Electrons are present in everything... EVERYTHING. Would it not then follow that all things are conscious at some basic level?
What do you think?
LOVELAUGHTER&&XHAOS
PALPABLE POPE Ypyskypo Skwyrl, the Y'sas
Loser of Found Souls, Temple of Appled Thought
Erisian Ataxia Troupe
If you enjoyed this post, feel free to follow me and check out a few of the others that I have authored!
- Introducing the official release of the #MinnowsUnite project!!! Check details inside to register!!
- Fire-bending practice! [First burn on my new fire-staff]
- On the Nature of Free-Will [Philosophical argument against Free-Will, and against Determinism]
- A photograph from my first successful garden [Papaver somniferum: The Opium Poppy]
- Why is there a green diamond above your head...? [Simulation Theory: Dabbing with a Mage Episode 26]
- 420 Followers!!! I get high, I get by - with a little help from my friends!
- Did you see what GOD did to us MAN!? [What is God? - Dabbing with a Mage Episode 25]
- Cannabis is the only reason that I am alive today - Self reflection at McMenamins amphitheater headlining Ziggy Marley in Portland, Oregon
- Living in a prism - everything is color! [Dabbing with a Mage Episode 24]
- Embrace the chaos and - Hail Eris today! [ What is Discordianism? - Dabbing with a Mage Episode 23]
- TRUMP IS IN THE ILLUMINATI FIGHTING FOR ULTIMATE CONTROL OF YOUR fnordSOULfnord!!! [#opMindFuck Engaged]
- Fortunate Are We, Those Who Practice The Craft [Chaos Magick 101: Giving thanks for a successful casting]
- I was drinking tea next to a pink waterfall with a griffin, and Barack Obama [What are dreams? - Dabbing with a Mage Episode 22]
- Ain't it Lovely When Your Work Pays Off? [My stolen vehicle was returned this morning with the important things remaining]
- Are you telling me you think humans are not a part of Nature? [Natural versus Unnatural: Dabbing with a Mage Episode 20]
- HF19 Still Proving Beneficial! STEEM on the rise again!
Join us in our Discord Server and become a part of the MinnowsUnite minnow pond to share on the rewards!
https://discord.gg/PdWxgus
Interesting article. A lack of understanding of natural phenomena doesn't mean an entity has awareness, though.
I can't say I understand enough about quantum mechanics to really comment any further or speculate about the nature of the phenomena or why it occurs in that fashion. But I don't think the results are significant enough to indicate consciousness of an electron, or of various other entities. It's a hell of an inductive leap to say that everything is conscious because of the as-yet-unexplained results of a particular test.
Either way, keep it coming. I like thinking about things in new ways.
I appreciate your comment. :)
I definitely agree that it is quite a leap; however, we also do not quite understand what consciousness is. All we understand about consciousness is that we experience a form of it. That said, is it really such a leap to say that things could have some sense of awareness, even if it doesn't imitate that of which we experience as a human?
I think we need to define consciousness more precisely, even if we don't completely understand how it works.
I don't think what you're describing is a form of consciousness; it's more like a potential among options. Consciousness requires awareness of oneself - do you think a plant is aware of itself, or an electron? Having preprogrammed options or tendencies and having consciousness are two very different things.
Good points @justinchase. :)
The idea that everything is conscious vastly predates modern science and double slit experiment. I am not sure if we will ever be able to truly answer the question of consciousness in relation to other living begins. It seems to me, more of a metaphysical and philosophical question than scientific one.
My personal experience of plants and animals suggest that they are indeed self aware, definitely much more than we often give them credit. It could be simply a projection on my part but so could be thinking that they have no awareness or limited awareness.
In our evolution as culture we often assumed inferiority of other beings, and indeed other humans, based on religious belief that god made us special by giving us soul and gave us domain over the earth. Scientific community, over the decades, often proved resistant to change in paradigm due to the influence of religion.
Perhaps I would trust current established scientific position more, if not the fact, that it mirrors our culture's dominant beliefs. It's also very convenient for us to see ourselves as more aware and conscious than everything else. It means we do not have to feel bad about killing in order to survive. I can not help but question it.
Consciousness does not necessarily require awareness of oneself, that is self-awareness.
As I've stated before, I do not necessarily believe in free-will, leaving us with "preprogrammed options or tendencies." This potential of action::reaction is the same as what we exist within, I see no difference than we believe we have absolute free-will.
Lets say consciousness is energy/electricity or bio energy life force. Could it not exist outside the physical form I wonder if it all connects in some way via particle interaction as life branches life to create more life infinitly. If you become aware of this code of consciousness communication is possible with anything that holds an energetic signature. To do this would not be the spoken word but the way your electricity merges with the electricity (or chi) of something else. Sort of what some call a spiritual alchemy. Great post by the way I loved it!
I don't know how I missed this comment!
Yes, this idea that you are referencing is what I mean by "consciousness is the nature of reality." Consciousness exists without a physical body, but a physical body gives it the capability of mobility and further expanding degrees of awareness.
Imo, telepathic communication goes along the lines of accessing this non-local consciousness and delivering or receiving messages through vibration.
Thank you for your comment!
Good writing man, very deep. It is a puzzling mystery from our perspective.
I think the omnipresence of consciousness is the GOD energy within everything, what joins us together through coincidences, and what holds each particle or the planets in a perfect order beyond our comprehension
Thank you greatly for your comment.
I definitely agree with you that the God energy is the ever present consciousness.
Electrons are ever where in everything - quantum entanglement states they are all connected - omnipresent
The double slit provides evidence of omniscience.
Now to provide evidence for omnipotence, or perhaps God is only omnipresent and omniscient?
what do you mean by omnipotence?
Omnipotence means all-powerful, the capability to change anything anywhere at any time.
If God is omnipotent, and omniprensent, and within us by definition, wouldn't that mean we have that potential?
hmmm, sounds like a powerful mage ;)
It would mean that we are within God as God would be the system in its entirety where we are exist as a fraction of the system's entirety.
1/2+1/2=2/2
As above so below, i think within us also.
if we are built in his image, wouldn't we be the physical manifestation of. i seen you change your car situation (not instant but you still made it happen)
Right, which means we are a part of such and have part of the capabilities, but not the entirety of such. We can access the infinite, but only from a finite point of consciousness as we are limited by the boundaries of the physical.
If we live in a holographic universe then each fraction of the whole would contain all the parts of the whole albeit in a less detailed form. If the universe is also infinite then this could explain the infinity we experience within ourselves.
The problem with trying to explain consciousness through science is that science still has no idea what it is. This is probably from the assumption that it arises from the matter of our brains or bodies or whatever. However, it rather clearly does not. If you want to know how matter interacts turn to physics but to understand things like consciousness and the soul you need to turn to metaphysics.
Nice article, well written and good flow. Following.
Thank you very much! Might I inquire as to what you enjoyed about the article?
Great article @alchemage.
I am not sure if everything is self aware and conscious but I definitely like the idea of it and I prefer to assume that's the case. My highly subjective experience of life seems to suggest that this is possible, but who knows. Just because I can talk with a stone or a tree, doesn't mean that they objectively speak to me. It might be all in my head.
I prefer to assume the universal consciousness because it helps me to be more empathic and take greater care of my environment. I see this as a philosophical and moral problem more than scientific one.
Everything is all in your head, and there's no way to prove otherwise. Every bit of understanding is processed through our sensory organs. Every measuring device has been created by our minds and is designed to work with our sensory organs. It is impossible to say beyond a doubt that everything is conscious, likewise impossible to say nothing is conscious.
I prefer to assume through experience and experiments that all things are conscious.
Philosophy can find its truths within science, science has its roots in Philosophy. ;)
Absolutely!
I like to think of the internet and technology in general as extensions of our senses. They are build to interact with our physicality, that we can not escape, but they expand what we can do biologically.
What I find fascinating about metaphysics, mysticisms and such, is that it allows us to speculate and make guesses about things we can not scrutinise scientifically just yet. Philosophy constitutes the basis of all science.
Which one's the consciousness again?
Quantum strangeness...
That's one hell of a rabbit hole...
i really enjoy this topic and i agree with a lot of what you have written.
i'd like you to explore the other way.
what if everything is manifested in the conscious reality (like a dimension) and it functions like a mirror to explore itself.
so to say an electron isn't really conscious before it is observed by a conscious (more complex form) and it only becomes so if we can see a pattern (familiar or not) that explains/expands our counsiousnes.
and if quantum strangness is a hell of a rabbit hole i don't know where the counscious hole could end
keep writing. i'm interested
I like the idea of Panpsychism.