What is ' consciousness ' ?

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Thomas123
Sage
Posts: 774
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2020 4:04 am
Has thanked: 122 times
Been thanked: 37 times

What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #1

Post by Thomas123 »

This word appears to be at the centre of many discussions on this forum. It also appears to mean different things to different people and, therein lies the root of our miscommunication. What range and definement do you attribute to, ' consciousness ' ?

Is there an external consciousness in the world?. Can I tune into a shared consciousness. I am listening to Prime Minister's Question Time, ....is Boris tuned into a universal human consciousness as he delivers his address. Is his brain working ,simultaneously and in tandem with my own consciousness and with that of others?

User avatar
EarthScienceguy
Guru
Posts: 2192
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 43 times
Contact:

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #141

Post by EarthScienceguy »

[Replying to DrNoGods in post #131]
Compare the intelligence levels of the earliest members of the genus Homo (habilis) with a modern human, or start with the 300K old Homo sapiens found in Morocco, or the Omo remains from Africa some 200K years ago. Look at the progression of brain size and archeaological information on what these creatures had the capacity to do. Habilis developed rock tools that required more intelligence than previously, but they looked much like chimps or bonobos. As you continue forward in time with Homo, they become more human like in appearance (ergaster, erectus, etc.), brain size increased, and things were developed like bows and arrows, cooking food, etc. Eventually sapiens appeared and we have anatomically modern humans, agrculture, writing, and all the technoligical advances during the last few thousand years (and especially the last 500). Who knows what we'll evolve into in another few million years if we're here at all. The proof of all of this is in the fossil record, and in the archeological records. We can see clearly the progression, even it we don't yet have every gap in the timeline filled.
So according to your theory neanderthals were smarter than modern man. Even though a modern man "evolved" from neanderthals. Yea that makes logical sense.

You also have the problem of if men are animals then psychology says that we make decisions in one of three ways

Sigmund Freud would say are decisions are based simply as a result of various repressed sexual tendencies.
Skinner would say that our decisions are based on conditioning and that freedom of choice is an illusion.
Crick would say that our decision-making is based on nothing more than the electrochemical process in the brain that is controlled by the genetic code. So this would not be any different than a serial killer whose genetic code programmed him to kill.

So which way gives us freedom of thought and the ability to appreciate beauty, music, art, and morality? which I say we have to have to be conscious.

User avatar
EarthScienceguy
Guru
Posts: 2192
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 43 times
Contact:

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #142

Post by EarthScienceguy »

nobspeople wrote: Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:11 am
EarthScienceguy wrote: Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:09 am [Replying to nobspeople in post #128]
Much like experiencing god in the trees, clouds or 'the heart'
How are you defining heart? Then I may agree with you.
The 'heart' where many believers claim they 'feel' or 'sense' god. In general, it could also mean any way one experiences god personally.
So are you saying the beating heart in your body? Is that where Christians say that is happening?

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #143

Post by nobspeople »

EarthScienceguy wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:44 am
nobspeople wrote: Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:11 am
EarthScienceguy wrote: Thu Apr 14, 2022 11:09 am [Replying to nobspeople in post #128]
Much like experiencing god in the trees, clouds or 'the heart'
How are you defining heart? Then I may agree with you.
The 'heart' where many believers claim they 'feel' or 'sense' god. In general, it could also mean any way one experiences god personally.
So are you saying the beating heart in your body? Is that where Christians say that is happening?
That's a good question. I think, when 'in the heart' is used, it's mostly used to speak about feelings. But it may depend on the person being asked as I have heard christians make statements that the physical heart (the actual beating muscle) holds emotions and feeling and memories so, for those, the answer might be different.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14003
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #144

Post by William »

[Replying to Tcg in post #140]

Okay. Pointing out the problem isn't casting judgement on it. Just telling it like it is.
Of course there is the science of materialism and of course misuse of anything has its ripple effect. And of course science cannot be achieved without scientists so it is all the 'same coin'.

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

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #145

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to William in post #139]
The way you worded that, it appears to be a veiled way to say "If only humans didn't breed so much, the science of materialism wouldn't have been as damaging as it has been."
The point was that human population has risen to such a level that the required use of Earth's resources to feed and house them all, handle their waste, accommodate industry, fight wars, etc. is at a much higher level than it was before the industrial revolution. It is humans who decided to build giant cities, develop airplanes for faster travel, etc. and science has enabled this to happen (eg. steel skyscrapers instead of wood huts, understanding how to make 800,000 lb loaded 747s fly). But that is just science being applied to solving problems or improving quality of life, and trying to keep up with an exponentially increasing number of humans that requires more resources of all kinds.

It wasn't a bunch of scientists and materialists who got together and decided we needed jets and skyscrapers and industrial farming operations. It was the population in general and science just provided the solutions that were demanded. The "science of materialism" (whatever that means) is not the source of the problem.
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

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

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #146

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to EarthScienceguy in post #141]
So according to your theory neanderthals were smarter than modern man. Even though a modern man "evolved" from neanderthals. Yea that makes logical sense.
Too much strawmanning here. First, it isn't my "theory", and second I never said Neanderthals were smarter than modern man. Nothing I said suggested that because Neanderthals had larger brains they were smarter ... I never even mentioned Neanderthals in my comments that you quoted. And I also never said that modern man evolved from Neanderthals, and neither does evolution. They were one of multiple branches in the Homo line that went extinct, but Homo sapiens and Neanderthals coexisted (and interbred) so obviously modern man did not evolve from Neanderthals.
You also have the problem of if men are animals then psychology says that we make decisions in one of three ways

Sigmund Freud would say are decisions are based simply as a result of various repressed sexual tendencies.
Skinner would say that our decisions are based on conditioning and that freedom of choice is an illusion.
Crick would say that our decision-making is based on nothing more than the electrochemical process in the brain that is controlled by the genetic code. So this would not be any different than a serial killer whose genetic code programmed him to kill.

So which way gives us freedom of thought and the ability to appreciate beauty, music, art, and morality? which I say we have to have to be conscious.
Men are animals, but what does the psychology of decision making have to do with that? It is a taxonomic classification. And who says that Freud, Skinner or Crick are right on how we make decisions? An animal can be conscious without appreciating any of the things you mentioned ... consciousness is not simply the level of intelligence of an animal, but you keep implying that it is. To use your phrase ... "according to your theory" only a very small number of animals with brains can be considered conscious. Are snakes not conscious? Do they just aimlessly wander around and hope food ends up in their mouth, or that a mating event happens by random chance?
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

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14003
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #147

Post by William »

[Replying to DrNoGods in post #145]
It wasn't a bunch of scientists and materialists who got together and decided we needed jets and skyscrapers and industrial farming operations.
The science of materialism is pretty much exactly that. Science is simply working out the means by which such can be achieved.
But as I remarked;
"Pointing out the problem isn't casting judgement on it. Just telling it like it is.
Of course there is the science of materialism and of course misuse of anything has its ripple effect. And of course science cannot be achieved without scientists so it is all the 'same coin'."

Scientists and materialists are the human part of the process - that part which comes from breeding.
Overpopulation has been enabled because of the science.

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

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #148

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to William in post #147]
Scientists and materialists are the human part of the process - that part which comes from breeding. Overpopulation has been enabled because of the science.
Yes ... better medicines and treatments to reduce infant deaths and lengthen lifetimes, safer buildings to protect from the elements, safer travel, etc. But the demand by the general populations of the world is what drove the process. Science was just the discipline that solved most of the technical problems, and of course it is scientists who practice that discipline. So science did enable overpopulation and the ripple effects of that (along with countless other advances that have helped humankind), but it (or materialism) is not the cause of it. It would have happened with or without people who can be described as materialists, as long as enough of them were scientists (and I grant that most scientists are probably materialists, but not all are).
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

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8488
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #149

Post by Tcg »

DrNoGods wrote: Fri Apr 15, 2022 10:22 pm [Replying to William in post #147]
Scientists and materialists are the human part of the process - that part which comes from breeding. Overpopulation has been enabled because of the science.
Yes ... better medicines and treatments to reduce infant deaths and lengthen lifetimes, safer buildings to protect from the elements, safer travel, etc. But the demand by the general populations of the world is what drove the process. Science was just the discipline that solved most of the technical problems, and of course it is scientists who practice that discipline. So science did enable overpopulation and the ripple effects of that (along with countless other advances that have helped humankind), but it (or materialism) is not the cause of it. It would have happened with or without people who can be described as materialists, as long as enough of them were scientists (and I grant that most scientists are probably materialists, but not all are).
Atheists and materialists aren't equivalent, but this study gives is some idea of its prevalence:

First worldwide survey of religion and science: No, not all scientists are atheists

The study’s results challenge longstanding assumptions about the science-faith interface. While it is commonly assumed that most scientists are atheists, the global perspective resulting from the study shows that this is simply not the case.

“More than half of scientists in India, Italy, Taiwan and Turkey self-identify as religious,” Ecklund said. “And it’s striking that approximately twice as many ‘convinced atheists’ exist in the general population of Hong Kong, for example, (55 percent) compared with the scientific community in this region (26 percent).”

The researchers did find that scientists are generally less religious than a given general population. However, there were exceptions to this: 39 percent of scientists in Hong Kong identify as religious compared with 20 percent of the general population of Hong Kong, and 54 percent of scientists in Taiwan identify as religious compared with 44 percent of the general population of Taiwan. Ecklund noted that such patterns challenge longstanding assumptions about the irreligious character of scientists around the world.

https://news.rice.edu/news/2015/first-w ... e-atheists

Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
EarthScienceguy
Guru
Posts: 2192
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 43 times
Contact:

Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?

Post #150

Post by EarthScienceguy »

[Replying to nobspeople in post #143]
That's a good question. I think, when 'in the heart' is used, it's mostly used to speak about feelings. But it may depend on the person being asked as I have heard Christians make statements that the physical heart (the actual beating muscle) holds emotions and feelings and memories so, for those, the answer might be different.
To the Jews, the heart was thought of more as having to do with the mind. The thinking part of you.
He’s saying there is something wrong with your heart—not the physical internal organ, but with your inner self, including your mind, thoughts, attitudes, motives, and desires. https://www.gty.org/library/blog/B21010 ... -the-heart
To the ancient Hebrews the heart was the mind, the thoughts. When we are told to love Elohiym with all our heart (Deut 6:5) it is not speaking of an emotional love, but to keep our minds and our thoughts working for him. https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/definition/heart.htm
So when it speaks of the heart in the Bible it is talking about your thoughts, attitudes, motives, and desires, feelings in ancient Hebrews are described as your bowls.

So when the Bible says that we need to love the Lord with all of our hearts. It is speaking of loving the Lord with our thoughts, attitudes, motives and desires. Not the physical heart.

Post Reply