Thanks so much for this inspiring response @metametheus, I like that a lot 😊

What I like about the axiomatic view on consciousness is that it is, for now at least, a more honest approach than just saying that consciousness is "emergent" from our brain's complexity. The same goes for the definition of "life"; there's no universally accepted definition of it, we don't really understand how inanimate molecules give rise to entropy-defying living organisms, so we just say that it's emergent, resulting from the complex interactions within a complex network. I have a big problem with this approach; other emergent properties we understand very well; one water molecule can't be liquid, solid or gas, only a complex system of inter-related molecules can take on those properties. It's nice that we know that chemistry emerges from physics and biology from chemistry. But this we can explain. In the case of life and consciousness emergence is but a guess.

To just say that consciousness is a fundamental property of the universe seems somehow logical and necessary; it seems the only way to begin to explain our reality without invoking some external power or entity.

But ultimately, this is a guess to, just a slightly better one in my opinion ;-) Like you I'm content to remain agnostic about this stuff, so I can dream about possibilities; knowledge can be liberating, but absolute knowledge is the end of science and curiosity... 🤓🙏