• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What scientific evidence do we have for the existence of human consciousness?

Gambit

Gambit

Well-Known Member
dgirl1986 said:
I think this is a bit of non statement given that the specifics of the term were not defined. Human consciousness can mean different things depending on the context and should therefore be defined before stating there is no evidence.
Click to expand...

I am defining "consciousness" as "awareness." Hopefully, that clarifies things for you.
 
P

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
Why should anyone need scientific evidence to convince them of the existence of something they experience personally every day? Conscious awareness fits that bill.
 
Bunyip

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
All scientific evidence is a consequence and demonstration of the existence of human consciousness. The existence of science is evidence of human consciousness.
 
Gary Sheldrake

Gary Sheldrake

Member
godnotgod said:
Except that universal consciousness is not a belief; it is an experience. No 'God' required.

Universal Consciousness is manifesting this entire Universe as individual things and as localized conscious beings we call 'I', where 'I' is purely illusory. Because 'I' is focused on the foreground of life, it has lost touch with it's background, which is Universal Consciousness, sort of like a fish born into the sea. He doesn't KNOW he's in the sea, and his focus is on his immediate foreground, in his case, food and predators. You might say he takes the background of the sea for granted, like totally. But the background, though passive, is crucial to his existence, just as the background of Universal Consciousness is crucial to ours, though we give the importance to sculpted, individual ego consciousness. Once the human being undergoes a spiritual awakening, he begins to get back in touch with the background, which is, of course, that which sustains him inside and out, physically, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually.
Click to expand...

What you say makes a lot of sense, but what I really like is that dog in your Avatar. It is my considered opinion that he or she is adorable. And the photo is considerable concrete evidence of it.
 
Milton Platt

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Gambit said:
Question:

What scientific evidence do we have for the existence of human consciousness?

Answer:

No evidence. There isn't any objective and measurable evidence that human consciousness even exists.

Why is this relevant? Because atheists demand scientific evidence for the existence of a universal or divine consciousness (a.k.a. God).

We can't objectively measure consciousness. We can only infer it.

Question:

Is there any scientific evidence to infer the existence of a universal or divine consciousness?

Answer:

Yes, most definitely. Due to quantum indeterminism, entanglement, and the observer effect, we have every reason to infer a universal consciousness. In fact, many of the founders of quantum mechanics did exactly that .
Click to expand...


Question: Can something without consiousness infer consiousness??
 
godnotgod

godnotgod

Thou art That
Runewolf1973 said:
A highly interactive form called a human brain.
Click to expand...

If that is the case, then the brain 'knows', or exhibits 'knowing'. Knowing is just another word for consciousness. But the assumption is that this knowing is an outcome of brain activity, rather than brain activity being the outcome of knowing. 'Emergent Theory' says that the material brain creates this non-material 'knowing', or consciousness, but cannot explain how the transition occurs from one state to the next, and so, ET is, at best, a weak hypothesis, rather than a sound scientific theory.

How does the brain become an object of its own activity? Perhaps that awareness is already in place prior to the brain coming into play. That awareness is consciousness. More technically, this pre-awareness is called 'metaphysic' (as opposed to metaphysics):

METAPHYSIC: The indefinable basis of knowledge. Metaphysical knowledge or 'realization' is an intense clarity of attention to that indefinable and immediate 'point' of knowledge which is always 'now', and from which all other knowledge is elaborated by reflective thought. A consciousness of 'life' in which the mind is not trying to grasp or define what it knows.

from: 'Myth and Ritual in Christianity'
 
Last edited:
Runewolf1973

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
godnotgod said:
If that is the case, then the brain 'knows', or exhibits 'knowing'. Knowing is just another word for consciousness. But the assumption is that this knowing is an outcome of brain activity, rather than brain activity being the outcome of knowing. 'Emergent Theory' says that the material brain creates this non-material 'knowing', or consciousness, but cannot explain how the transition occurs from one state to the next, and so, ET is, at best, a weak hypothesis, rather than a sound scientific theory.
Click to expand...


What we call consciousness is the result of many interactions happening all at once, not just in the brain, but outside the brain as well. It is a cumulative effect.
 
Runewolf1973

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
godnotgod said:
So, according to you, the entire Universe is conscious.
Click to expand...


Not at all. Does something like a rock have eyes, ears, or a nose? As humans we are evolved with the ability to interact with many more mechanisms than just our brains, we interact with every part of out body. That cumulative effect is not about just processing stuff in our brains, it is also about having the ability to interact with things outside of ourselves. Would we be aware of smell without a nose? Would we be aware of color without eyes? Would we be aware of music without ears? The brain processes all that information, but those interactions extend far beyond the brain. It is not just about processing stuff in the brain, it is also about gathering information (interacting) outside of the brain. We interact with our environment in a complex manner. Some creatures interact in a less complex manner. Evolution just fined-tuned our ability to interact. Human "consciousness" is perhaps the most complex form of interaction.
 
Last edited:
Runewolf1973

Runewolf1973

Materialism/Animism
Milton Platt said:
And isn't that what being conscious is????
Click to expand...


To some yes, but it seems that not everyone agrees with what consciousness is. Some think it is only in the brain, while others think it is something mystical. Some think it only exists in human brains while other animals or creatures do not have it. So when I say it doesn't exist means that I am just ignoring the word "consciousness" altogether. I don't like the term consciousness. It is vaguely defined and misunderstood. I prefer to just call it like it is...a complex form of interaction. Everything interacts in some way, some things just interact in more complex ways than others. Is a tree conscious? I don't really know, but certainly a tree does interact with its environment in a complex manner. There are many different levels of interaction and complexity. Humans just evolved to interact in the most complex manner. So I say to heck with this whole flakey notion of being "conscious". We interact in a complex manner, that is all.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top