Is the universe conscious of itself...

[Makaranda]

Sentient beings are conscious, but there is no evidence that consciousness extends beyond sentient beings.

The problem I have with "the universe is conscious of itself" is that it implies the universe is like a sentient being with self-awareness, and there is no evidence for that.

Your point is well taken, Norman, but if we want to stay true to the meaning of words (as outhouse is so adamant about) we have to speak accurately. When we say "the universe" it is with reference to the totality of all space and matter, and that includes organic matter. It is because nouns usually imply individual entities that there is this vagueness. Just as "bike" is no more than its constituent parts, the universe is no more than a totality of constituents. It is a fact (according to the materialist view) that there are billions of sentient\conscious beings comprised of organic matter, and organic matter is a constituent of the universe. Therefore it is not incorrect to say that the universe is conscious. It is, however, factually incorrect to say the opposite, since it amounts to a denial of the evidence and introduces an unwarranted dualism. And that is "unsubstantiated word play", since it has for its support the mutilation of the meaning of words.

Sometimes I think people get so consumed with being right on a forum that they say all kinds of silly things without thinking.

-Edited

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

But you have know way of knowing that.

You can't test it, you cannot find evidence to support such claims.

Second, scientists are only just beginning to see more than what the ancient and medieval people could see with their naked eyes, and lot of their knowledge (before the invention of the telescopes) are based on superstitions and false belief of what they know about the stars in the sky. They have no technology to know what they could see, and they knew nothing of the universe. To them (ancient and medieval astronomers), the whole world is just what they could see in their horizons, afraid to fall of the edge of the world, and the sky was a dome in which stars, planets and clouds move about in their sky. That the night and day is not caused by the movement of the sun from horizon to horizon (geocentric planetary motion model), that the Earth rotate, causing day and night to alter, depending on which side of the Earth is facing the Sun (heliocentric planetary motion model).

They used to think angels were the Sun, stars, moon and planets, or that the angels were involved in the movement of these heavenly bodies. But with increasing better technology, therefore building more reliable and better telescopes, we now know there are no angels or gods involved with the planetary objects or movement, or the stars. We are able to know why and explain why planets and stars move, and how gravity cause movement of not just the Earth rotating on its axis

But even today, there are people, mainly religious people, who are still use superstitions to explain what they don't understand, and saying that the universe, is just another example of more superstition.

Superstition because your conclusion is based on your belief, and not through logic and observable evidences.

It's superstition to believe that because people (and other living things as well) are part of the universe, and have consciousness, the universe itself can be said to be in some way conscious? Limited, yes, but the analogy of cells in a body not being conscious and only some of the cells directly contributing to consciousness seems like a valid analogy to me; please enlighten me on how it is NOT a valid analogy.

As I said, whether or not the universe-as-a whole can be considered conscious in the same sense as humans are conscious would require evidence, which I just don't see what kind it would be or how we would acquire it in any objective manner. But part of the universe being conscious I think is well-enough demonstrated to accept the proposition that the universe is in part, conscious of itself. Unless you reject the propositions that humans and their consciousness are part of the universe.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

My words were quite clear, and they stand academically. It must be that evidence I would like that has you running in fear.


The universe is not conscious.

Now if someone has evidence outside fantasy and imagination and mythology, please feel free to share that evidence with us.

Your words are quite clear. What is lacking is any argument or reasoning to back it up, beyond: "Hey, I think it's nonsense, so I don't have to go to the trouble of showing where my reasoning is correct and yours is incorrect." If they stand academically, please give me the citations that back up your position that the universe cannot be considered to be conscious of itself despite the evidence of human consciousness.

And frankly, if I were running in fear of you and your paltry argument, I wouldn't be responding to you now.

I've laid out my reasoning, and asked you for yours, and asked you to explain where mine is wrong. You keep repeating your undefended pedantic assertions. You accuse others of fantasy, of vague word games, not realizing that all human language is fantasy and "word games," all human arguments are fantasy and word games, that are only as valid as the meanings we clearly define and the reasoning we clearly use--and the evidence we can collect and present. SAYING that the universe is not conscious is not presenting the evidence or reasoning for reaching that conclusion. Since I have presented what I believe to be a valid argument, based in evidence, I again ask you to show your evidence and demonstrate the errors in my reasoning.

 

[BSM1]

Yes

Frankenstrat with emg's leveled and crowned frets, Schaller tremolo.
No name nylon string
Yamaha 12 and 6 string from the 70's
Ibanez artcore af75 F hole hollowbody

Now if I could just play lOl

Oh, 5 guitars. I'm up to 16 including my new Gretsch Pro-Jet, LOL.

 

[Nakosis]

Something I've been thinking about lately
Are we just a product of the universe becoming conscious of itself?

As I see it, a person is not really conscious of themselves. What they are conscious of is a concept of self which they identify with. We create, really imagine a self. A virtual image. This is want we are conscious of.

So I don't really see the universe being able to be conscious of itself anymore than we can be actually conscious of being.

Self-conscious, you are conscious of this, really imaginary, self you create. So the universe would have to create a self, really an illusionary self image to be conscious of.

I guess, according to my beliefs, this is what you are. An illusionary concept of a self which the universe creates in order to have a self to be aware of.

Actually therefore I suppose I'd agree with your statement. You were created as a "self" so the universe could have a self to be aware of. Though maybe not a becoming of something but rather what already is.

It's just a belief. A reasonable extension of my other beliefs that, for whatever my own reasons are, I've come to accept.

 

[outhouse]

Therefore it is not incorrect to say that the universe is conscious.

The universe is factually not conscious because animals on one planet are known to be conscious.


Anything else is word play and wish and want, fantasy and mythology.


The universe has conscious animals in it. The universe factually has no conscious abilities.

 

[outhouse]

the universe cannot be considered to be conscious of itself

Provide evidence the universe is conscious of itself. There is none. I don't have to provide any source for others imaginative word play.

Consciousness FACTUALLY only exist in animals, and the universe is factually not an animal.

 

[outhouse]

Is the universe self aware? Factually there is no evidence.

Your arguments are so pathetically weak, it amounts to the same logic and reason as claiming my toe is conscious because my brain is

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Consciousness FACTUALLY only exist in animals, and the universe is factually not an animal.

1) Animals are part of the universe, and animals are aware, therefore part of the universe is aware of itself, at the very least. Stated another way: among the set of things that the universe consists of is consciousness; therefore, the universe is conscious because it is one of the things it contains.
2) You are now arguing that because consciousness is only know by humans on earth in 2015 to exist in animals on earth, it does not and cannot exist anywhere else. This is a general assertion of a negative, which while in theory might be tested if we could go everywhere in the universe across all time, we cannot. At best, FACTUALLY we lack evidence that computing machines, other non-animals, and the universe in general have consciousness at this time; absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There is no a priori reason that they could not have it. To generalize to the rest of the universe is a not supported by logic.
3) In the academic discussion of consciousness, there is still no standard definition of nor model for consciousness--there are some who argue that consciousness is real, but others who argue that even though humans experience a state we define as consciousness, it is an illusion, and even humans are not conscious. But at this point, it boils down to belief about what model or models the present evidence supports or does not. Since the experts do not agree on what consciousness is or where and how it arises, it would be premature to say that the universe--or computing machines, or non-animals, or anything else, for that matter--is not capable of consciousness.
4) I have already stated that I don't believe that there is any evidence that the universe as a whole is self-aware; and I doubt there would be any evidence that humans could find to support such a proposition. In other words, I think it is an inherently untestable proposition, and it is not in any way, shape or form what I am arguing.

I quite accept that you do not agree with my interpretation/understanding of the terms we are using. You, however, have failed to clarify how you interpret/understand them, or to provide any supporting reasoning or evidence to support your repeated assertions. I am reminded of the Monty Python sketch, where a gentleman pays to engage in a debate with a man behind the desk, who proceeds to simply naysay everything the gentleman says. Here, on a discussion and debate forum, you are simply naysaying, while others actually attempt to offer evidence, definitions, and arguments in logical manner.

So, have a nice life. I'll not be responding to any more of your posts, ever, on any subject should I come across them. I'd have a more interesting time debating with my cat.

 

[outhouse]

Your arguments are so pathetically weak, it amounts to the same logic and reason as claiming my toe is conscious because my brain is

 

[outhouse]

2) You are now arguing that because consciousness is only know by humans on earth in 2015 to exist in animals on earth, it does not and cannot exist anywhere else.

Please provide evidence where I have stated it cannot exist anywhere else, you cannot because that would require honesty as I never even implied that.


I stated

Consciousness FACTUALLY only exist in animals, and the universe is factually not an animal

That's is factual at this time unless you have evidence it exist elsewhere. YOU DONT It is all that is known at this time. But please feel free to keep moving goal post and taking me out of context


Your desperate and focusing only on what I say, because you have NOTHING for evidence to share with the group.

 

[outhouse]

3) In the academic discussion of consciousness, there is still no standard definition of nor model for consciousness

Unsubstantiated rhetoric

Consciousness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself.[1][2] It has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind


It does not say conscious might be does it?

 

[outhouse]

Consciousness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself.[1][2] It has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind


The universe does not factually apply to this in any way outside fantasy, imagination or mythology.

 

[outhouse]

therefore part of the universe is aware of itself, at the very least.

So my big toe conscious because its attached to a human brain that is conscious

 

[outhouse]

Good news!!!

The USA is conscious and aware of itself, because it contains animals that are conscious! !!!! quick run and tell everyone

 

[Makaranda]

The universe is factually not conscious because animals on one planet are known to be conscious.


Anything else is word play and wish and want, fantasy and mythology.


The universe has conscious animals in it. The universe factually has no conscious abilities.

Repeating your claim without addressing any objections to your assertions. What a novel way to win an argument! Just because you say a thing over and over again doesn't make it any more true. I have addressed your semantics quibble with reference to the dictionary definition of the word universe. Consult the dictionary.

Bloody hell, you are like a Christian. Well, at least they hide their sneering arrogance under a veneer of humility.

 

[outhouse]

I have addressed your semantics

Not in any credible manner sir.

The USA is conscious and aware of itself, because it contains animals that are conscious!

OR

my big toe conscious because its attached to a human brain that is conscious

Are not credible statements that are using the same EXACT logic you propose

 

[leibowde84]

Something I've been thinking about lately
Are we just a product of the universe becoming conscious of itself?

Since we are part of the universe, and we are conscious of the universe of which we are a part, than logically it would follow that the universe is conscious of itself.

 

[outhouse]

Sometimes I think people get so consumed with being right on a forum that they say all kinds of silly things without thinking.

You mean like saying the universe is conscious when there is no credible evidence in support?


The proper context academically is to state the universe contains conscious animals. Anything else is simply out of context word games that amounts to philosophical idealism. [word games]

 

[outhouse]

Since we are part of the universe, and we are conscious of the universe of which we are a part, than logically it would follow that the universe is conscious of itself.

Is the USA conscious and aware of itself, because it contains animals that are conscious?