why does human mind exist, and how did it arise in nature?

[Nous]

Why does consciousness exist, and how was it selected for in generation after generation, in species after species (if it is supposedly not causally efficacious, as many people erroneously claim) are good questions that should be asked often.

Consciousness has a survival value over unconsciousness.

Plants seem to survive quite well without consciousness.

In any case, since you (naturally) didn't address either of the questions I noted, I'll point out that consciousness cannot be selected for unless it has an effect on the organism, i.e., unless consciousness is causally efficacious.

 

[DavidFirth]

I don't think the human mind arose in nature. I believe it was created by God.

 

[David T]

it's either a senseless fluke, or a purposed intention.

why does anything in nature function.

the eye, why does it see, vs being entirely useless?

if you want provide links to what you consider good info, or offer your best explanation.

No the OP is proof. It started as a book and that manifested nature.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

in my years of high school and college I never once was exposed to evolution.

what drives natural selection? they say it is undirected chance, is that true?

according to the theory yes

 

[jonathan180iq]

it's either a senseless fluke, or a purposed intention.

This is called a false premise...

False premise - Wikipedia

 

[ArtieE]

I don't think the human mind arose in nature. I believe it was created by God.

And God's mind, where did that come from?

 

[osgart]

This is called a false premise...

False premise - Wikipedia

okay it's either mindless chance, or purposed intention. what else would it be?

The chance events that led to human existence

 

[Milton Platt]

in my years of high school and college I never once was exposed to evolution.

what drives natural selection? they say it is undirected chance, is that true?

Whoever says that does not understand evolution. Evolution is directed by genetic selection, for one.

 

[shunyadragon]

okay it's either mindless chance, or purposed intention. what else would it be?

The chance events that led to human existence

More likely that Natural Law and the natural circumstance of the environment led to human existence. Chance does not play a causal deterministic role in the outcome of events.

Proposed intention would be a theistic assumption, which could be the case if God's Natural Laws, environment, reflect the intent of God for Creation of humanity.

 

[Ponder This]

it's either a senseless fluke, or a purposed intention.

why does anything in nature function.

the eye, why does it see, vs being entirely useless?

if you want provide links to what you consider good info, or offer your best explanation.

Is this an existential question? As in, if everything arose from nothing, then just what is "surviving"? Why do we have minds? If we argue that minds developed for survival, then it implies that something pre-existed the mind that was trying to "survive". What is that? It's the mystery of life.

Some will say there is no point, but if that's true, then why are living things trying to survive? Just what are they protecting? What's so precious about life? So it seems that even if we argue that life came to be simply through random chance, we can't dismiss that somehow it has value. It's important in some fundamental way and how can that be if it is just another random process happening on a distant rock floating through an empty void? An interesting dilemma.

 

[osgart]

Is this an existential question? As in, if everything arose from nothing, then just what is "surviving"? Why do we have minds? If we argue that minds developed for survival, then it implies that something pre-existed the mind that was trying to "survive". What is that? It's the mystery of life.

Some will say there is no point, but if that's true, then why are living things trying to survive? Just what are they protecting? What's so precious about life? So it seems that even if we argue that life came to be simply through random chance, we can't dismiss that somehow it has value. It's important in some fundamental way and how can that be if it is just another random process happening on a distant rock floating through an empty void? An interesting dilemma.

it is a mystery, thats one thing that makes it interesting. and no one has ruined it for me that way with all the answers either.

it's also worth experiencing from the spiritual side of things. even if there's no such thing as spirit, if that makes any sense. I don't even see myself as an arrangement of molecules, nor an illusion, nor just some brain state. I see more to it.

if I'm chasing ghosts so be it. there's a lot of things people seem to gravitate to, that I don't even want.

 

[ArtieE]

Is this an existential question? As in, if everything arose from nothing, then just what is "surviving"? Why do we have minds? If we argue that minds developed for survival, then it implies that something pre-existed the mind that was trying to "survive". What is that? It's the mystery of life.

Some will say there is no point, but if that's true, then why are living things trying to survive? Just what are they protecting? What's so precious about life? So it seems that even if we argue that life came to be simply through random chance, we can't dismiss that somehow it has value. It's important in some fundamental way and how can that be if it is just another random process happening on a distant rock floating through an empty void? An interesting dilemma.

No dilemma. Chemical evolution resulted in life. Some early living things survived, some didn't. Those who did things to survive, survived. It's just instinct. Why are we trying to survive? Because we are descendants of organisms who tried to survive. Those who didn't try to survive, didn't survive. To the universe there's nothing precious about life. There is no value to life beyond the value we put on survival because we have an evolved survival/self-preservation instinct.

 

[Father]

Evolution. as for why. probably due to the need for more complex communication and processing.
along with extra power thanks to our eating cooked food.

 

[jonathan180iq]

okay it's either mindless chance, or purposed intention. what else would it be?

The chance events that led to human existence

Absolutely anything else that your imagination could conjure up...

You're starting this whole conversation, and the very premise of your argument, on the assumption that it must be one or the other. Have you firmly established that it could only be those two possibilities and nothing else?

What if existence is all an illusion? What is nothing is actually real?
What if existence is eternal, with no beginning or end?
What if the very idea of reasons is merely a social construct that constantly fools you?

Can you handily deny any of these other reason for emergence which, I should add, are just as viable as your first two?

 

[Milton Platt]

Is this an existential question? As in, if everything arose from nothing, then just what is "surviving"? Why do we have minds? If we argue that minds developed for survival, then it implies that something pre-existed the mind that was trying to "survive". What is that? It's the mystery of life.

Some will say there is no point, but if that's true, then why are living things trying to survive? Just what are they protecting? What's so precious about life? So it seems that even if we argue that life came to be simply through random chance, we can't dismiss that somehow it has value. It's important in some fundamental way and how can that be if it is just another random process happening on a distant rock floating through an empty void? An interesting dilemma.

Actually, what preexisted a "mind" were single celled organisms. Those that were better suited to their environment survived at a greater rate than those lesser suited, so those genes would get passed along at a greater rate. The favorable genes would eventually dominate because of greater survival rate and overall larger reproduction rate. It is brains that developed in this sense as well. You seem to be trying to apply the abstract concept of "mind" to the theory of Evolution, which is simply the explanation of the diversification of life. Certainly the ability to be cognizant of one's surroundings through sensory organs and to make decisions based on these inputs (such as fight or flight response) can be seen as an advantage. The ability to think is profoundly useful. It has helped humans dominate the planet. So why is it hard to imagine that?

 

[Ponder This]

No dilemma. Chemical evolution resulted in life. Some early living things survived, some didn't. Those who did things to survive, survived. It's just instinct. Why are we trying to survive? Because we are descendants of organisms who tried to survive. Those who didn't try to survive, didn't survive. To the universe there's nothing precious about life. There is no value to life beyond the value we put on survival because we have an evolved survival/self-preservation instinct.

I see, so would you say that the instinct to survive is inevitable?
And, by extension, that the existence of the human mind is also inevitable?

And yet, here we are now with our minds able to contemplate the significance of our survival and consider that we may merely have but an instinct to survive and that there is nothing particularly precious to life because "To the universe there's nothing precious about life." The existential dilemma remains because we are able to take our instincts into consideration and ask the transcendental question: Is life worth living to begin with? The manner in which we arose fails to resolve the philosophical dilemma. It can only suggest that it was inevitable.

 

[Ponder This]

Actually, what preexisted a "mind" were single celled organisms. Those that were better suited to their environment survived at a greater rate than those lesser suited, so those genes would get passed along at a greater rate. The favorable genes would eventually dominate because of greater survival rate and overall larger reproduction rate. It is brains that developed in this sense as well. You seem to be trying to apply the abstract concept of "mind" to the theory of Evolution, which is simply the explanation of the diversification of life. Certainly the ability to be cognizant of one's surroundings through sensory organs and to make decisions based on these inputs (such as fight or flight response) can be seen as an advantage. The ability to think is profoundly useful. It has helped humans dominate the planet. So why is it hard to imagine that?

I think there are two very different questions. One question asks how we could possibly evolve the way we did. The other question is philosophical and asks if there is any point to our existence. The answer to one question does not answer the other question.

 

[Milton Platt]

I think there are two very different questions. One question asks how we could possibly evolve the way we did. The other question is philosophical and asks if there is any point to our existence. The answer to one question does not answer the other question.

I just hate it when I agree with someone.....arguing is so much more fun.

 

[DavidFirth]

And God's mind, where did that come from?

God is Spirit. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Before God created places there was no place for anything to have come from.

 

[Milton Platt]

God is Spirit. He is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Before God created places there was no place for anything to have come from.

So god existed in no place, then? How does that work?

If there are no "places", then there is no place for anything to exist....so by default, god did not exist because there was no place for him to do so.