Some scientists believe the universe is conscious

[Balthazzar]

I object to the conclusion in the bold above. All these things are similar in they can be explained in terms of the Laws of Nature, but they do not behave in a similar ay as you propose, The planets and the stars behave as they do based more on the Laws of Gravity, The protons, electrons and neurons behave based Quantum Mechanics and Electromagnetic principles not gravity. The neural connections of the brain behave more on the biological neurology principles.. All fundamentally based the Laws of Nature and natural processes.

Maybe, maybe not. This is an explorable field of scientific study, and I would be surprised if it isn't already studied and based on solid foundational truths as a theory, whatever the theory itself may be. Me? It wouldn't surprise me. I'll presume it. I'm ok with this. If it isn't doesn't operate in a similar way as our brains, via vibrational patterns and movement of particles and light waves, etc.? I'm ok with that too.

We are made from the substance of, and we do receive our own data from, and it has enabled us to develop as we do, being connected to the "network" itself. I have no reason not to view it this way.

 

[shunyadragon]

Is this your definition of consciousness?
It is not difficult to define consciousness. It is the interaction of the brain and the body, between others and the surrounding environment.

This is an adequate simple definition that works Post #25 and #51 goes into more detail

That is the resources in humans that interact to form consciousness but not a definition of what it is.

It is a definition of what consciousness is based on the fundamental neurological behavior of the brain of animals with a complex nervous system. Post #91 lists attributes of consciousness lacking in plants,

I have never said the universe having consciousness but rather the basic material for consciousness is present in the universe. We know about humans because we experience it.

The basic materials, Laws of Nature and Natural processes of our universe adequately explain consciousness in animals with a complex nervous system.

Plants have memory, plants support each other through complex relationships beneath the ground. The people doing the science in this area are not pseudo scientists. Scientism which is not science is present in this article.

False, as described in post #91.

But science needs to control what can be studied

Science does very well to achieve this goal

and keep the evil people trying to think differently from ever being able to publish in a scientific journal because we scientist do not want to consider it. That is what they implied in your article. My experience in science has seen scientist make absolutism claims later proved wrong. The problem is not in science but in the arrogance that comes when someone feels superior than others which is evident in any group of people including scientist. Science has problems in studying complex interaction because it handles them in reductionist techniques.

Evil? How bizarre. More bogus accusations like scientism. This does not really represent anything comprehensible concerning the question of defining consciousness.


It appears as fr as the definition of consciousness you appear to be appealing to a dualism of consciousness where there is consciousness that cannot be explained by the definitions provided.

 

[Audie]

As long as can remember, yes. I stated this much, specifically. I'm pretty sure, I was conscious early in my life. I'm pretty sure my early ansestors were also. They made tools. Birds are conscious also, and dogs, and cats, etc. Point two as idle fantasy...consciousness is evident. It may have developed over time, but it exists and likely long before we became consciously aware as humans. Dolphins are conscious, I think and whales, etc. The universe is conscious. I have no idea how this can be denied. Whether or not it operates similar to our human brains is conjecture, but I have absolutely no reason not to think it extremely possible if not probable.

You were not conscious as an embryo of 4 cells.

Your ancestors- 99.999.. percent, were not
human.

Most were not even vertebrates.

Still more had no brain.

As for saying the universe is conscious you can present yourself as you wish.

I avoid just saying things
it’s intellectually dishonest, and insensible.

 

[Balthazzar]

You were not conscious as an embryo of 4 cells.

Your ancestors- 99.999.. percent, were not
human.

Most were not even vertebrates.

Still more had no brain.

As for saying the universe is conscious you can present yourself as you wish.

I avoid just saying things
it’s intellectually dishonest, and insensible.

My mother was conscious, and maybe our ancestors' mothers were too, and who cares if vertebrates have no brain? Yet, many species do have brains, and if not brains, they are still connected to the substance that enables thought. I don't know the details, but I do know consciousness to be existent. Why avoid it unless you are intellectually dishonest and insensible?

 

[Audie]

My mother was conscious, and maybe our ancestors' mothers were too, and who cares if vertebrates have no brain? Yet, many species do have brains, and if not brains, they are still connected to the substance that enables thought. I don't know the details, but I do know consciousness to be existent. Why avoid it unless you are intellectually dishonest and insensible?

I was speaking of you not your mother.
if you want to claim you were conscious from
the moment of conception, and that evolution is
false, say so now so I can transfer you to ig city.