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?
What is ' consciousness ' ?
Moderator: Moderators
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9388
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 911 times
- Been thanked: 1262 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #181"A spokeswoman for the British Veterinary Association pointed out that vets could treat humans."Sherlock Holmes wrote:"So, since a vet treats animals and people don't (well, I don't) visit a vet when their sick, people really aren't animals."
Your reasoning wasn't convincing to begin with. I just wanted to show that it is also faulty.
I would hide too.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #182I've finished with this theme.Clownboat wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 3:27 pm"A spokeswoman for the British Veterinary Association pointed out that vets could treat humans."Sherlock Holmes wrote:"So, since a vet treats animals and people don't (well, I don't) visit a vet when their sick, people really aren't animals."
Your reasoning wasn't convincing to begin with. I just wanted to show that it is also faulty.
I would hide too.
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14218
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 913 times
- Been thanked: 1645 times
- Contact:
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #183It is complex.Thomas123 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 16, 2020 8:59 am 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?
The way I have come to understand the complexity of the involvement of Consciousness within the Experiential Reality Sets [ERS] has to do with those Sets and how they are experienced, and this forms many layers of Consciousness, all of which are connected to The Source Consciousness, {SC}, some of which are unaware to various degrees, that this is the case.
Diagraphically, this transposes as;
Superimposed color signifies the layers of awareness individuate consciousness is involved with in the Sets
- 2ndRateMind
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 1540
- Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
- Location: Pilgrim on another way
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 68 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #184Broadly speaking, I take consciousness to be the difference between a plant and an animal. Cabbages are not conscious. Dogs are.
Best wishes, 2RM.
Non omnes qui errant pereunt
Not all who wander are lost
Not all who wander are lost
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6629 times
- Been thanked: 3222 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #185This just popped into my email and I thought some of you might be interested in the discussion.
Anil Seth on the Hard Problem of Consciousness, the Self, and the Essence of Volition
Discussion between Dr. Michael Shermer and Anil Seth
https://www.skeptic.com/michael-shermer ... 1ba6e4a581
(You can watch or listen at the link or on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, iHeartRadio, Stitcher, and TuneIn)
Anil Seth on the Hard Problem of Consciousness, the Self, and the Essence of Volition
Discussion between Dr. Michael Shermer and Anil Seth
https://www.skeptic.com/michael-shermer ... 1ba6e4a581
(You can watch or listen at the link or on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, iHeartRadio, Stitcher, and TuneIn)
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
- Inquirer
- Banned
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #186I'm 1 minute 47 seconds in and the host is talking about war...brunumb wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 4:24 am This just popped into my email and I thought some of you might be interested in the discussion.
Anil Seth on the Hard Problem of Consciousness, the Self, and the Essence of Volition
Discussion between Dr. Michael Shermer and Anil Seth
https://www.skeptic.com/michael-shermer ... 1ba6e4a581
(You can watch or listen at the link or on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, iHeartRadio, Stitcher, and TuneIn)
OK skip to 3 minutes 18 seconds if you want to skip the chit chat...
- Inquirer
- Banned
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #187[Replying to brunumb in post #185]
I've listened to 16 minutes and although it is of some interest I can't get a clear idea of what Seth actually believes with respect to consciousness. Not sure if he has a concrete opinion even or if he is simply fascinated by the subject.
I've listened to 16 minutes and although it is of some interest I can't get a clear idea of what Seth actually believes with respect to consciousness. Not sure if he has a concrete opinion even or if he is simply fascinated by the subject.
- Inquirer
- Banned
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #188I'm of the opinion that the primary problem with consciousness and free will and so on, is that we are insisting that it be scientifically explicable, that it can be subject to reductionism like everything else we strive to explain scientifically.
It could actually be that it cannot be reduced, that it is a fundamental aspect of reality that stands apart from the deterministic universe. The struggle we have is when we insist on trying to represent consciousness and free will in terms of materialism, as some quality that can emerge from matter and laws of nature.
That is to me, the actual problem, because if consciousness is a distinct fundamental quality apart from the laws of nature, matter, forces, then we will never succeed in "understanding" it in terms of those things. If we cling to a belief in materialism and causality then we are doomed to always fail.
It will take a big change in how we view things though to ever adopt this approach, much as the link between electricity and magnetism was never once suspected until quite late in the study of them, then it all "clicked" into place. There is no electricity, there is no magnetism there is only electro-magnetism a single concept that was perceived as two unrelated distinct things but in the end was never that. Electricity and magnetism are forever inextricably linked aspects of a more profound phenomenon, well expressed with Maxwell's equations.
The point of that little digression is to suggest that free will, consciousness is the basis of (not emergent from) the material universe we perceive around us, as I mentioned in a related thread, free will can choose to behave, to appear as determinism, we can behave deterministically if we choose to but we are not compelled to.
It could actually be that it cannot be reduced, that it is a fundamental aspect of reality that stands apart from the deterministic universe. The struggle we have is when we insist on trying to represent consciousness and free will in terms of materialism, as some quality that can emerge from matter and laws of nature.
That is to me, the actual problem, because if consciousness is a distinct fundamental quality apart from the laws of nature, matter, forces, then we will never succeed in "understanding" it in terms of those things. If we cling to a belief in materialism and causality then we are doomed to always fail.
It will take a big change in how we view things though to ever adopt this approach, much as the link between electricity and magnetism was never once suspected until quite late in the study of them, then it all "clicked" into place. There is no electricity, there is no magnetism there is only electro-magnetism a single concept that was perceived as two unrelated distinct things but in the end was never that. Electricity and magnetism are forever inextricably linked aspects of a more profound phenomenon, well expressed with Maxwell's equations.
The point of that little digression is to suggest that free will, consciousness is the basis of (not emergent from) the material universe we perceive around us, as I mentioned in a related thread, free will can choose to behave, to appear as determinism, we can behave deterministically if we choose to but we are not compelled to.
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9388
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 911 times
- Been thanked: 1262 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #189The truth is, we don't understand consciousness. Seems like we could be making progress though:Inquirer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:13 am I'm of the opinion that the primary problem with consciousness and free will and so on, is that we are insisting that it be scientifically explicable, that it can be subject to reductionism like everything else we strive to explain scientifically.
It could actually be that it cannot be reduced, that it is a fundamental aspect of reality that stands apart from the deterministic universe. The struggle we have is when we insist on trying to represent consciousness and free will in terms of materialism, as some quality that can emerge from matter and laws of nature.
That is to me, the actual problem, because if consciousness is a distinct fundamental quality apart from the laws of nature, matter, forces, then we will never succeed in "understanding" it in terms of those things. If we cling to a belief in materialism and causality then we are doomed to always fail.
It will take a big change in how we view things though to ever adopt this approach, much as the link between electricity and magnetism was never once suspected until quite late in the study of them, then it all "clicked" into place. There is no electricity, there is no magnetism there is only electro-magnetism a single concept that was perceived as two unrelated distinct things but in the end was never that. Electricity and magnetism are forever inextricably linked aspects of a more profound phenomenon, well expressed with Maxwell's equations.
The point of that little digression is to suggest that free will, consciousness is the basis of (not emergent from) the material universe we perceive around us, as I mentioned in a related thread, free will can choose to behave, to appear as determinism, we can behave deterministically if we choose to but we are not compelled to.
Electromagnetic energy in the brain enables brain matter to create our consciousness and our ability to be aware and think, according to a new theory developed by Professor Johnjoe McFadden from the University of Surrey.
https://www.technologynetworks.com/neur ... eld-341866
"The theory is based on scientific fact: when neurons in the brain and nervous system fire, they not only send the familiar electrical signal down the wire-like nerve fibres, but they also send a pulse of electromagnetic energy into the surrounding tissue. Such energy is usually disregarded, yet it carries the same information as nerve firings, but as an immaterial wave of energy, rather than a flow of atoms in and out of the nerves.
This electromagnetic field is well-known and is routinely detected by brain-scanning techniques such as electroencephalogram (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) but has previously been dismissed as irrelevant to brain function. Instead, McFadden proposes that the brain’s information- rich electromagnetic field is in fact itself the seat of consciousness, driving ‘free will’ and voluntary actions. This new theory also accounts for why, despite their immense complexity and ultra-fast operation, today’s computers have not exhibited the slightest spark of consciousness"
It would be faulty to assume that the above is true without further testing of course. As we sit now, we don't understand consciousness fully, but there was also a time when humans didn't understand earthquakes, volcanoes or lightning. Ancient humans use to insert their preferred god(s) as explanations for unknowns. We should know better by now I would think. We should evidence a god explanation, not just proclaim it as our ancestors did thus stopping the need for further investigation. To assert the gods, does humanity a disservice.
Again, if we don't pretend to understand how consciousness arises, we can continue to investigate like Professor Johnjoe McFadden is doing.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
- Inquirer
- Banned
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: What is ' consciousness ' ?
Post #190But on what grounds do you insist that consciousness does emerge from unconscious material? How do you know it is not a distinct agency independent of materialism? If it is then it explains rather a lot, it explains why we cannot frame an explanation for consciousness in terms of unconsciousness. I've read about this subject on and off for some forty five years and we get no closer to understanding this. Yes our arguments change, our observations change, but qualitatively we have gained absolutely nothing with the possible exception of Penrose's work and admitting even that is but a tiny step because it leans toward indeterminism anyway.Clownboat wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 12:58 pmThe truth is, we don't understand consciousness. Seems like we could be making progress though:Inquirer wrote: ↑Wed Jun 22, 2022 11:13 am I'm of the opinion that the primary problem with consciousness and free will and so on, is that we are insisting that it be scientifically explicable, that it can be subject to reductionism like everything else we strive to explain scientifically.
It could actually be that it cannot be reduced, that it is a fundamental aspect of reality that stands apart from the deterministic universe. The struggle we have is when we insist on trying to represent consciousness and free will in terms of materialism, as some quality that can emerge from matter and laws of nature.
That is to me, the actual problem, because if consciousness is a distinct fundamental quality apart from the laws of nature, matter, forces, then we will never succeed in "understanding" it in terms of those things. If we cling to a belief in materialism and causality then we are doomed to always fail.
It will take a big change in how we view things though to ever adopt this approach, much as the link between electricity and magnetism was never once suspected until quite late in the study of them, then it all "clicked" into place. There is no electricity, there is no magnetism there is only electro-magnetism a single concept that was perceived as two unrelated distinct things but in the end was never that. Electricity and magnetism are forever inextricably linked aspects of a more profound phenomenon, well expressed with Maxwell's equations.
The point of that little digression is to suggest that free will, consciousness is the basis of (not emergent from) the material universe we perceive around us, as I mentioned in a related thread, free will can choose to behave, to appear as determinism, we can behave deterministically if we choose to but we are not compelled to.
Electromagnetic energy in the brain enables brain matter to create our consciousness and our ability to be aware and think, according to a new theory developed by Professor Johnjoe McFadden from the University of Surrey.
https://www.technologynetworks.com/neur ... eld-341866
"The theory is based on scientific fact: when neurons in the brain and nervous system fire, they not only send the familiar electrical signal down the wire-like nerve fibres, but they also send a pulse of electromagnetic energy into the surrounding tissue. Such energy is usually disregarded, yet it carries the same information as nerve firings, but as an immaterial wave of energy, rather than a flow of atoms in and out of the nerves.
This electromagnetic field is well-known and is routinely detected by brain-scanning techniques such as electroencephalogram (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) but has previously been dismissed as irrelevant to brain function. Instead, McFadden proposes that the brain’s information- rich electromagnetic field is in fact itself the seat of consciousness, driving ‘free will’ and voluntary actions. This new theory also accounts for why, despite their immense complexity and ultra-fast operation, today’s computers have not exhibited the slightest spark of consciousness"
It would be faulty to assume that the above is true without further testing of course. As we sit now, we don't understand consciousness fully, but there was also a time when humans didn't understand earthquakes, volcanoes or lightning. Ancient humans use to insert their preferred god(s) as explanations for unknowns. We should know better by now I would think. We should evidence a god explanation, not just proclaim it as our ancestors did thus stopping the need for further investigation. To assert the gods, does humanity a disservice.
Again, if we don't pretend to understand how consciousness arises, we can continue to investigate like Professor Johnjoe McFadden is doing.
Logically arguing that free will, consciousness, awareness are external to and distinct from the causal laws of nature and science leads to a better explanation than clinging stubbornly to the insistence that it "emerges" from unconscious causal laws of nature, the latter is us fruitlessly trying to force reality to fit our worldview when we should be willing to adjust our worldview to fit reality.
Those who are devotes of scientism will never understand consciousness, they are looking in the wrong place (the creation), it is the creation that is explained by will, consciousness, there is no other way to create other than to have will, therefore will must underpin everything even the laws of nature and matter and energy, these are all consequence of will - God's will, there is simply no scientific way to explain them.