What is consciousness?

[Kilgore Trout]

I suspect, for many people, "consciousness" has become as nebulous and meaningless of a word as "energy" has. This is completely understandable, and predictable, in a scientifically and technologically-advanced world still mostly populated with fantasy-prone people who believe in magic.

The explosion of knowledge and information, and its expression in our daily lives is in no way reflective of human beings in general. It's the result of the combined progress of a tiny minority of humanity over time. I think many people have the illusion that they had some part in creating the world as it now is, or that it even representative of their perspective and capabilities in any way.

The use of "sciency" words and concepts to promote magical thinking is a widespread, and constant expression of this.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I suspect, for many people, "consciousness" has become as nebulous and meaningless of a word as "energy" has. This is completely understandable, and predictable, in a scientifically and technologically-advanced world still mostly populated with fantasy-prone people who believe in magic.

The explosion of knowledge and information, and its expression in our daily lives is in no way reflective of human beings in general. It's the result of the combined progress of a tiny minority of humanity over time. I think many people have the illusion that they had some part in creating the world as it now is, or that it even representative of their perspective and capabilities in any way.

The use of "sciency" words and concepts to promote magical thinking is a widespread, and constant expression of this.

Indeed, and when it comes to consciousness, pseudo-science is regularly used in a vain attempt to lend credibility to what are essentially religious beliefs.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I would be more than happy to accomodate you except for the fact that I do not indulge in new age dogma. Perhaps you are thinking of someone else?
I have addressed the topic. If you fail to understand, perhaps I can point to the moon again for you. If you still do not understand, perhaps another 30 years on your meditation mat may do the trick....or maybe not.
hint: 'what is consciousness?' Who, or what, is asking the question?

The same old arrogant rhetoric and lame ad-homs. You STILL haven't provided a coherent response to the substance of my earlier post, further demonstration that you are only here to preach your new-age dogma, and not the least bit interested in genuine discussion.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

ho-hum, you're boring me, while completely ignoring what I have been saying to you. Are you deaf, ignorant, or both?

Drop the personal attacks and respond to the substance of my earlier posts ( #33 and #35 ).

Let's see if you are capable of having a genuine discussion. Let's see if you are capable of thinking outside your new-age box and considering different points of view. Based on your past behaviour here I'm not optimistic, but perhaps you will surprise us all.

 

[godnotgod]

Drop the personal attacks and respond to the substance of my earlier posts ( #33 and #35 ).

Let's see if you are capable of having a genuine discussion. Let's see if you are capable of thinking outside your new-age box and considering different points of view. Based on your past behaviour here I'm not optimistic, but perhaps you will surprise us all.

You sure enjoy propping yourself up as credible, while labeling me with your propaganda and lies. You are not even aware of what you are doing, are you? Do you realize that you are foisting your Shadow on me while portraying your Persona as worthy, credible, and authoritative? You persist with your insistence that I am in a 'new age' box, spouting what you call 'pseudo science' and 'new age Hinduism'. As long as you continue with your twisted views, and as long as you cling to your materialist paradigm while coyly asking stupid questions like: 'what is consciousness?', there is no chance for any kind of real discussion. Don't you see that you have established preconceived ideas about Reality, while pretending that you are being 'objective', 'fair', and 'open-minded'?

 

[godnotgod]

What is consciousness?

My view is that consciousness is that which subjectively experiences. Nothing in the physical universe matters except subjective experience.

Where does this consciousness come from. I believe it is the only fundamental thing in the universe, The physical universe is just a creative emanation of this fundamental primordial thing called consciousness. As I believe physicist Max Planck has said 'we can't get behind what this consciousness is'. Life as humans for example are sparks of the infinite consciousness animating a temporary limited physical vehicle for the purpose of finite experiencing.

I disagree with the materialist school of thought that consciousness can be created by any structure of physical matter. It would just be atoms and electrons moving around with no single experiencer. What is there that makes them experience as a single entity?

I agree. Seems most people are trying to 'explain' consciousness' via some form of materiality, and fail to get that what they only think to be materiality is not only illusory, but an outcome of consciousness. They mainly adhere to this idea of Emergent Theory, which hypothesises that consciousness is a product of the brain, somewhat akin to the notion that the images on the tv screen have their origin in the tv set itself, rather than in the non-local tv signal.

As for atoms and electrons, its not that they are conscious, but rather that consciousness is what is manifesting itself as atoms and electrons, and all the rest of it.

I think rather than ask 'what is consciousness?', we should ask 'who, or what, is asking the question.


And just to add to your comment from Max Planck:

"That which IS the Knower, the Ground of All knowledge, is never Itself an object of knowledge."
- Shankara

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You sure enjoy propping yourself up as credible, while labeling me with your propaganda and lies. You are not even aware of what you are doing, are you? Do you realize that you are foisting your Shadow on me while portraying your Persona as worthy, credible, and authoritative? You persist with your insistence that I am in a 'new age' box, spouting what you call 'pseudo science' and 'new age Hinduism'. As long as you continue with your twisted views, and as long as you cling to your materialist paradigm while coyly asking stupid questions like: 'what is consciousness?', there is no chance for any kind of real discussion. Don't you see that you have established preconceived ideas about Reality, while pretending that you are being 'objective', 'fair', and 'open-minded'?

The same arrogant rhetoric, the same dishonest games, the same ad homs. You are like a broken record and you STILL haven't provided a coherent response to my earlier posts.

Clearly you are incapable of thinking outside your new-age box because you are surgically attached to your Chopra-inspired dogma. Clearly you are only here to proselytize, and clearly you are not the least bit interested in genuine discussion.

 

[1137]

Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, though itself immaterial. It's analogous to a child and its mother: at first the former is entirely reliant on the later, but with time, care, and effort it can grow to be a separate force in the cosmos.

 

[George-ananda]

Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, though itself immaterial.

For matter to create a single entity immaterial consciousness, it seems to me there would have to be some 'magic' step in there being glossed over. I, for one, believe in the incarnation theory of consciousness.

 

[1137]

For matter to create a single entity immaterial consciousness, it seems to me there would have to be some 'magic' step in there being glossed over. I, for one, believe in the incarnation theory of consciousness.

Is magic required for H2O to become wet?

 

[George-ananda]

Is magic required for H2O to become wet?

No. But that analogy doesn't apply at all here. Groups of atoms becoming conscious as a single entity does require some mysterious step.

 

[godnotgod]

The same arrogant rhetoric, the same dishonest games, the same ad homs. You are like a broken record and you STILL haven't provided a coherent response to my earlier posts.

Clearly you are incapable of thinking outside your new-age box because you are surgically attached to your Chopra-inspired dogma. Clearly you are only here to proselytize, and clearly you are not the least bit interested in genuine discussion.

Until you can free yourself of your wildly speculative concoctions, there is no 'genuine' discussion.

 

[godnotgod]

Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, though itself immaterial. It's analogous to a child and its mother: at first the former is entirely reliant on the later, but with time, care, and effort it can grow to be a separate force in the cosmos.

We know the flow of processes involved with a child growing away from its mother, but it is a far cry to 'explain' non-material consciousness as emergent from the material brain. At precisely which point does this occur? It's just speculation at this point, and a poor one at that. It's called 'Emergent Theory', but does not qualify as a bona fide scientific theory at all.

A child simply changes from it's dependency on one environment to another.

 

[1137]

We know the flow of processes involved with a child growing away from its mother, but it is a far cry to 'explain' non-material consciousness as emergent from the material brain. At precisely which point does this occur? It's just speculation at this point, and a poor one at that. It's called 'Emergent Theory', but does not qualify as a bona fide scientific theory at all.

A child simply changes from it's dependency on one environment to another.

Well we know property dualism is true, but that substance dualism is unlikely. This makes emergent dualism pretty much the only valid position.

 

[godnotgod]

Well we know property dualism is true, but that substance dualism is unlikely. This makes emergent dualism pretty much the only valid position.

As I understand it, property dualism is a sub-branch of emergent materialism, and that:

"It asserts that when matter is organized in the appropriate way (i.e., in the way that living human bodies are organized), mental properties emerge."

Dualism (philosophy of mind) - Wikipedia

Two things: One, it is still only conjecture, and two, it does not address how matter becomes organized 'in the appropriate way' as a prerequisite for consciousness to 'emerge'. Therefore, it begins with an assumption of matter already having been organized without consciousness as a factor.

Descartes is an original author of dualism, but in his famous cogito, he makes the assumption of 'I' already existing, building his theory on that false premise.

 

[Copernicus]

Like so many philosophical discussions, this starts out with a complex concept--"consciousness"--without really defining it. So people wander all over the place as they struggle to impose their sense of the word on the discussion. One thing to take into account is that consciousness comes in degrees. It isn't like an on-off switch. So other animals are conscious, but they do not necessarily experience the world with our degree of consciousness.

 

[godnotgod]

Like so many philosophical discussions, this starts out with a complex concept--"consciousness"--without really defining it. So people wander all over the place as they struggle to impose their sense of the word on the discussion. One thing to take into account is that consciousness comes in degrees. It isn't like an on-off switch. So other animals are conscious, but they do not necessarily experience the world with our degree of consciousness.

That's an important observation. In the world of spirituality, consciousness has many levels*. The level that most humans operate on in daily life is termed 'Identification' or 'Waking Sleep', in which man really thinks himself to be awake, but in reality, is living a kind of fictional existence**, from which a higher awakening is possible. The next level of consciousness, that of Self-Transcendence, is considered to be the beginning of a true awakening. Then there are several levels above that, the highest that a human can achieve being Supreme Enlightenment, which is the level the Buddha attained.

*1st Level: Sleep without dreams
2nd Level: Sleep with dreams
3rd Level: Waking Sleep (Identification)
4th Level: Self Transcendence (Self Remembering)
5th Level: Objective Consciousness (Cosmic Consciousness)

source: The Master Game, by Robert S. de Ropp

**This is conditioned awareness. Awakening from this state is unconditioned awareness.

 

[psychoslice]

What isn't Consciousness ?.

 

[David T]

Isn't the question circular in nature? This more of an unhealthy symptom than a valid question.

 

[Copernicus]

What isn't Consciousness ?.

I would say that it is awareness of self and one's surroundings. We are partially conscious when we dream. That is, we have a sense of self and an imaginary sense of being situated. However, our bodies are normally paralyzed in that state, and we don't have full awareness of our situation.

Does an animal that cannot recognize itself in a mirror lack awareness of self? I suspect not, but it does not have the ability to conclude that the image it is looking at is not a different animal from itself. Realizing that is a higher level of awareness, but lacking it is not an absence of consciousness. Indeed, by treating the reflected image as a different animal, it must have an awareness of self. A bird that flies into a window because it wants to scare off a perceived intruder on its territory is making a fairly complex calculation about its environment. It is just a mistaken calculation.

Brains build models of reality and imaginary causal models of how its surroundings will change or behave. Human brains are just extremely good at building very complex models, and testing experiences against those models--a perception of change--is part of consciousness.