Is a rock conscious?

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Swami
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:07 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Is a rock conscious?

Post #1

Post by Swami »

Contrary to popular belief, I view consciousness as being a simple phenomena rather than arising from a complex system. Here are my reasons:

1. Consciousness can exist as pure awareness state (without thought, emotions, forms, etc.) which is a state I reach during meditation. You can have one without the other!
2. Simple forms of life (no complex brain needed), e.g. plants and fish, possess consciousness.
3. Experience. This goes back to point 1 and how I perceived reality while in a pure conscious state. All matter is simply a manifestation of an indivisible field of Consciousness. Read more: Using field research (Meditation) to discover Consciousness.

When Danmark asks how a rock is conscious I think that he's supposing that it could only be conscious if it has feelings, processes information from sensory receptors, etc. But again, consciousness does not have to exist with all of these things. It comes in degrees; its most basic form is pure awareness. Consciousness exists and is expressed differently between awake humans and those in vegetative state or between fish and plants or computers and rocks. It seems scientists do not know where to draw the line when it comes to where consciousness exists.

One label for my view is "panpsychism". Here's a good article explains it:
Consciousness permeates reality. Rather than being just a unique feature of human subjective experience, it’s the foundation of the universe, present in every particle and all physical matter.

This sounds like easily-dismissible bunkum, but as traditional attempts to explain consciousness continue to fail, the “panpsychist� view is increasingly being taken seriously by credible philosophers, neuroscientists, and physicists, including figures such as neuroscientist Christof Koch and physicist Roger Penrose.

The materialist viewpoint states that consciousness is derived entirely from physical matter. It’s unclear, though, exactly how this could work.

Dualism holds that consciousness is separate and distinct from physical matter

Panpsychism offers an attractive alternative solution: Consciousness is a fundamental feature of physical matter; every single particle in existence has an “unimaginably simple� form of consciousness, says Goff. These particles then come together to form more complex forms of consciousness, such as humans’ subjective experiences. This isn’t meant to imply that particles have a coherent worldview or actively think, merely that there’s some inherent subjective experience of consciousness in even the tiniest particle.
Quartz article.

Given that consciousness can exist or function in a simple form, then what proof is there to show that consciousness is limited to mammals? Why not fish, plants, computers, and other inanimate matter? Perhaps you don't know?

User avatar
Swami
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:07 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #21

Post by Swami »

Divine Insight wrote:
Razorsedge wrote: Actually, I've verified a lot of my view using an Eastern approach. Eastern religions emphasize meditative experiences instead of faith.

You might disagree with my approach by preferring to stick to the Western science approach, but then I'd question why your approach is any better. And by "better" I'm referring to being better suited to deal with the issue of consciousness.
For me science is "better" because it's an approach to questions about reality that results in being able to make predictions about reality that can then be tested and verified.

There are countless examples of this in science, but just to point at one I'd point to The Special Theory of Relativity which predicted that time is not absolute but rather it can be dilated. This was a prediction that could be tested. When it was tested it was found to be correct. Time truly does dilate in our real world.

So where does the "guess" that all things are conscious lead to?
It pushes consciousness to the point of being fundamental property of the Universe as opposed to just being a product of it. This takes consciousness beyond the brain.
Divine Insight wrote:But does this "guess" make any predictions that can be tested and verified?

If so, then please describe at least one such predication as I have done for the sciences.
The verdict is out on these questions because of our limitations on measuring consciousness. We can't directly prove that others are conscious, let alone everything else in the Universe. My theory is based mostly on evidence gathered from the Eastern approach and I don't how it would all translate into something that Western science can work with. I can point to some things that would at least show that consciousness is more than the brain - like NDEs, anesthesia awareness. Perhaps we can also take a negative route by point to the inability of Western science to directly observe consciousness, to explain its origin and nature, etc. If my view is correct, then the shortcomings of Western science on this issue is to be expected.

This is why I encourage Western scientists to engage in Eastern approaches so they can see if or how the Western perspective can be applied.
Divine Insight wrote:If not, then why call it a "better" method of inquiring about the true nature of reality?

It should be clear that a method of inquiry that produces verifiable predictions should be considered to be "better" than one that cannot do this.

Don't you think this is a reasonable position to take? :-k
I agree that the Western approach is very good in terms of ensuring validity. But the real question I'm getting at is if Western science is an option at all because of the nature of consciousness. If it were a option, then of course I would choose it and would not need to rely on Eastern science for any part of it. But as it stands, I see nothing but methodological and epistemic limitations/challenges for Western science when it comes to explaining consciousness. This shows in that your scientists have not explained consciousness and many are starting to resort to Eastern thinkers/approaches.

User avatar
SkyChief
Apprentice
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:15 pm
Location: L.A.
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #22

Post by SkyChief »

It seems that Panpsychism is a religion like Pantheism.

Pantheism holds that the entire universe as a manifestation of God.

Because no physical evidence can support that belief, it is a religion, and cannot be used as a model of reality.



Panpscychism holds that all matter has some degree of consciousness.

Because no physical evidence can support that belief, it is a religion, and cannot be used as a model of reality.

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Post #23

Post by Divine Insight »

Razorsedge wrote: This is why I encourage Western scientists to engage in Eastern approaches so they can see if or how the Western perspective can be applied.
They have already been doing this for many years and have found nothing useful in the Eastern approaches. In fact, Eastern cultures have plenty of scientists who are aware of both approaches to questioning the nature of reality and they recognize that the Western scientific approach works, while the Eastern mystical approach does not.

So your idea that Western scientists aren't aware of the Eastern approaches is simply wrong. I've studied both myself. Science makes verifiable predictions. Eastern mysticism does not. It's really that simple.

Western science works.
Eastern mysticism doesn't.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Swami
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:07 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #24

Post by Swami »

Divine Insight wrote:
Razorsedge wrote: This is why I encourage Western scientists to engage in Eastern approaches so they can see if or how the Western perspective can be applied.
They have already been doing this for many years and have found nothing useful in the Eastern approaches. In fact, Eastern cultures have plenty of scientists who are aware of both approaches to questioning the nature of reality and they recognize that the Western scientific approach works, while the Eastern mystical approach does not.

So your idea that Western scientists aren't aware of the Eastern approaches is simply wrong. I've studied both myself. Science makes verifiable predictions. Eastern mysticism does not. It's really that simple.

Western science works.
Eastern mysticism doesn't.
I appreciate your insight. The only thing that Western science has to show for is "technology" and some interesting facts here and there. However, this is all a distraction compared to the big questions of life. The Eastern approaches are very relevant for knowing the origin and nature of man and reality overall.

DeMotts
Scholar
Posts: 276
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 1:58 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 22 times

Post #25

Post by DeMotts »

Is a hydrogen atom conscious?

User avatar
Divine Insight
Savant
Posts: 18070
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:59 pm
Location: Here & Now
Been thanked: 19 times

Post #26

Post by Divine Insight »

Razorsedge wrote: The Eastern approaches are very relevant for knowing the origin and nature of man and reality overall.
Really? :-k

So how about sharing with us what verifiable truths about the origin and nature of man and reality they have been able to reveal?

I've studied the Eastern philosophies for decades. I'm unaware of any verifiable knowledge of the origins and nature of man and reality. I'm fully aware of what they are imagining it might be like. But that's hardly knowledge. That's just a guess perpetuated by wishful hopes and dreams that it might be true.

Hey, they might accidentally be right! But that's not the same as "knowledge".

And by the way, Eastern mysticism would be wonderful if true. Life is but a dream, and we are the dreamer. Who wouldn't be thrilled with that? It's quite inviting, I can't argue against that. But that doesn't make it a relevant approach to discovering truth.
[center]Image
Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]

User avatar
Swami
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:07 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #27

Post by Swami »

delete
Last edited by Swami on Wed May 29, 2019 9:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Swami
Sage
Posts: 510
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 1:07 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Post #28

Post by Swami »

DeMotts wrote: Is a hydrogen atom conscious?
All matter is conscious. Any type of matter can respond to us in the way that we want but the key thing is that this happens when we're at a different level of consciousness. Jesus said if you tell a mountain to jump into the sea, it will. How does the mountain know to do this?
Divine Insight wrote:
Razorsedge wrote: The Eastern approaches are very relevant for knowing the origin and nature of man and reality overall.
Really? :-k

So how about sharing with us what verifiable truths about the origin and nature of man and reality they have been able to reveal?

I've studied the Eastern philosophies for decades. I'm unaware of any verifiable knowledge of the origins and nature of man and reality. I'm fully aware of what they are imagining it might be like. But that's hardly knowledge. That's just a guess perpetuated by wishful hopes and dreams that it might be true.

Hey, they might accidentally be right! But that's not the same as "knowledge".

And by the way, Eastern mysticism would be wonderful if true. Life is but a dream, and we are the dreamer. Who wouldn't be thrilled with that? It's quite inviting, I can't argue against that. But that doesn't make it a relevant approach to discovering truth.
It's not for me to verify but rather it is you that needs to verify it. I gave you an objective and accessible approach - meditation. I can not force you to use it.

User avatar
DrNoGods
Prodigy
Posts: 2716
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Nevada
Has thanked: 593 times
Been thanked: 1642 times

Post #29

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to post 26 by Razorsedge]
Jesus said if you tell a mountain to jump into the sea, it will. How does the mountain know to do this?


It doesn't ... no mountain has ever "jumped into the sea" by command of a human. If that were ever observed to happen then you could ask how it happened ... ie. what is the mechanism. But it has never happened, and since mountains are just rock and sand and therefore incapable of consciousness or deliberate action, it is certain that a mountain can never respond to something it is told to do by a human ... regardless of what Jesus may have said about the matter.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

DeMotts
Scholar
Posts: 276
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 1:58 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 22 times

Post #30

Post by DeMotts »

[Replying to Razorsedge]

Is a photon conscious? It's not matter.

Post Reply