gw
Junior Member
@gw
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 556
|
Post by gw on Jul 24, 2021 5:50:46 GMT
I don't know enough to speak extensively on the matter but along with human consciousness comes a selective awareness of feeling of your body. If we were able to trace this back to the firings of neurons in your brain and nervous system that are happening at the moment, then would there be any reason to believe that panpsychism is viable? Why should we suspect there to be any consciousness in a being smaller than an insect?
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jul 24, 2021 8:17:06 GMT
Possible, but not likely. But who knows? If that's the way it is, then that's the way it is.
I would bet against it at even money, though. But I have lost a lot of bets.
In order to promote better communication, I avoid the term referred to as "consciousness" here (I don't use the term "consciousness", because it's ambiguous, and materialists and fundamentalists both continuously flip flop the definition of that word in mid stream to suit their illogical conclusions).
I use the term "meter reader", which gives a better understanding, and also it's a term that probably won't change in definition in the middle of communication about it.
I believe it's more likely to be in the other direction in which we see a "meter reader". A direction where there are fewer meter readers than most people believe.
For example, ants are typically believed to be colonies in which the queen is the meter reader. At least that's what I find logical. It could be that all ants are meter readers, but that defies logic, because the ants just act much the same way as cells of a human body do. They communicate to the colony and simply function as part of the colony.
Still, mammals are certainly complex. It appears from observation within and without that there are more than one entity in each human. Is there more than one in each dog and each cat? Each squirrel?
Does a "colony meter reader" for some life forms mean one colony? One group of colonies? Perhaps an entire species is one meter reader. Where does the magic line get drawn? We see illogical "colonies of thought" among humans, as though groups of a few, or even of thousands, just magically understand each other with poor communication skills. They will say one thing, and mean another thing, and yet these "groups" understand each other in their poor communication. These groups are "mobs", and experience humans learn all mobs are Satanic. Does each mob form a demon? Or does a demon form each mob?
I am pretty sure that the five senses we use to measure everything by are not capable of deciphering the answer to this question. A sixth or seventh sense would be needed. So, since it's all speculation, maybe their theory is correct.
|
|
gw
Junior Member
@gw
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 556
|
Post by gw on Jul 24, 2021 21:28:34 GMT
I don't know enough to speak extensively on the matter but along with human consciousness comes a selective awareness of feeling of your body. If we were able to trace this back to the firings of neurons in your brain and nervous system that are happening at the moment, then would there be any reason to believe that panpsychism is viable? Why should we suspect there to be any consciousness in a being smaller than an insect? Are there other forms of consciousness that humans are unware of? Studies of old forests, that is forests that have had time to build up an extensive root system, indicate that trees seem to be in communication with each other. The supposition is it is the subatomic particles that may have a "consciousness" that creates what we see and experience around us. There is a Spinoza thread and this somewhat agrees with his philosophical theory about creation itself as God. Hmm. The thing I wonder is whether it takes a brain/mind of some sort to sense all the local feelings and create awareness of them. Octopi have shown that not all cognitive tasks need be done in a centralized brain which opens the door for plants to have feelings if they have the right cells. However, plants don't have nerve cells. Even if they do have some sort of sensation, I don't know if they have the cognition to be aware of it. Maybe by studying nerve cells and comparing them to plant cells we might find whether they have awareness of what they're feeling. Maybe there is a property of subatomic particles that creates consciousness. But for that matter, maybe there are only certain subatomic particles, atoms or molecules that lead to consciousness. It could be a byproduct of electricity or something else that we don't know. It'll take somebody with a better memory than mine to find the answer.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jul 26, 2021 6:18:06 GMT
I don't know enough to speak extensively on the matter but along with human consciousness comes a selective awareness of feeling of your body. If we were able to trace this back to the firings of neurons in your brain and nervous system that are happening at the moment, then would there be any reason to believe that panpsychism is viable? Why should we suspect there to be any consciousness in a being smaller than an insect? Are there other forms of consciousness that humans are unware of? Studies of old forests, that is forests that have had time to build up an extensive root system, indicate that trees seem to be in communication with each other. The supposition is it is the subatomic particles that may have a "consciousness" that creates what we see and experience around us. There is a Spinoza thread and this somewhat agrees with his philosophical theory about creation itself as God. I had heard of the theory about trees, but hadn't pursued it. It will be interesting to see where this goes.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 26, 2021 16:29:24 GMT
Philosophers can't even agree on whether other animals are conscious, and in some cases whether other humans (besides oneself) are conscious. There's similar debate concerning artificial intelligence. And it seems that neither scientists nor philosophers are anywhere close to devising a procedure to identify or measure consciousness. Until we do, speculating about consciousness seems to me to be as futile as cavemen discussing the size and shape of Earth.
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jul 26, 2021 23:53:19 GMT
Philosophers can't even agree on whether other animals are conscious, and in some cases whether other humans (besides oneself) are conscious. There's similar debate concerning artificial intelligence. And it seems that neither scientists nor philosophers are anywhere close to devising a procedure to identify or measure consciousness. Until we do, speculating about consciousness seems to me to be as futile as cavemen discussing the size and shape of Earth. Sometimes stupid questions can lead to unexpected discoveries. Like, if the entirety of the universe is 0s and 1s, and our information assemblage organ, the brain, made of 0s and 1s, that processes the 0s and 1s of our environment into what we call consciousness, then is it unreasonable to speculate, as a means to armchair philosophize, that consciousness is not limited solely to a human brain that conceptualizes reality (the information that surrounds us) only a certain way? We are only now attempting to understand anthropomorphic consciousness. Why assume it’s all about us? For what it's worth, I lean toward thinking that consciousness will end up being a broad if emergent property to be found in lots of places in the universe. I tend to think that artificial intelligence (when it gets sufficiently advanced) will be just as conscious as humans. But I also think that there's some kind of conceptual breakthrough that awaits discovery, a kind of aha moment that once made will suddenly cast a new light on consciousness and from then on everyone will wonder why it took so long for us to figure it out. Sort of like the realization that the heart is a blood pump and not something more mysterious.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jul 27, 2021 2:22:28 GMT
Shinto (Japanese: 神道, romanized: Shintō) is a religion which originated in Japan. ... Shinto is polytheistic and revolves around the kami ("gods" or "spirits"), supernatural entities believed to inhabit all things. The link between the kami and the natural world has led to Shinto being considered animistic and pantheistic.
Old news.
It is called SHINTO.
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jul 27, 2021 18:20:44 GMT
That's nothing new. That's just a new word for an ancient concept. It's called animism and it's the religion of millions of people worldwide.
本当?
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Aug 3, 2021 17:44:25 GMT
I think there's some truth to it. Whatever god created, it is imbued with his essence.
Call god the universe, it makes no difference. We're like ants trying to understand a skyscraper.
Say there is no god at all and scientists call it "pansychism" and propose it as well.
It's a bit like synchronicity.
Good analogy. Maybe someday we will evolve enough to understand the natural world in all its complexity, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
|
|
|
Post by Morgana on Aug 7, 2021 9:41:14 GMT
I cannot give an opinion on what the article says, since I am not qualified to do so, but I have always believed that trees are conscious. I've believed that since I was a little girl and wrote this poem:
When will the wind ever show it's face When will the moon come down from space, When will the trees come alive again When will the lovers, love
|
|
|
Post by permutojoe on Aug 7, 2021 21:03:25 GMT
Panpsychism and the more refined (my opinion) cosmopsychism both present an interesting alternative solution to the mind-body problem.
|
|