Where does consciousness come from? Most people have been taught that consciousness only originates in small lumps of grey matter, such as the brains of humans and possibly other higher species, while the rest of the universe is devoid of this quality. But how can some forms of matter possess consciousness while others do not? After all, our brains are composed of the same atoms and molecules as the rest of the universe. More and more philosophers are approaching the theory of panpsychism, which claims that all matter has some form of consciousness or mind.
The British biologist Rupert Sheldrake has long proposed similar ideas. In his book A new Science of Life (1981), he introduced his well-known theory of morphic resonance, which suggests that all self-regulating systems in nature, such as cells, plants, and animals, inherit a form of collective memory called the morphic field. Patterns of behavior and organization are influenced by similar past forms and experiences, creating a non-local transfer of information and memory across time and space, known as morphic resonance. In his bestselling book "The Science Delusion" (2012), Sheldrake addresses similar topics in the chapters "Is Nature Mechanical?" and "Is Matter Unconscious?»
In 2021, he published a paper in the Journal of Consciousness Studies titled "Is the Sun Conscious?" Sheldrake admits that even asking such a question seems utterly ignorant, even childish. However, he draws on numerous sources from different fields of science to support his ideas. He argues that it is certainly possible that self-organizing systems at all levels of complexity, including stars and galaxies, might have experience, awareness, or consciousness.
But how can some forms of matter possess consciousness while others do not? After all, our brains are composed of the same atoms and molecules as the rest of the universe.
But seriously, have you got any thoughts on how consciousness arises from/in unconscious matter? I think people would be interested in that no matter their stance on panpsychism. It’s not called the Hard Problem for nothing.
He doesn't need to elaborate on the conventionally accepted theory. That's your responsibility to research and know when discussing alternatives. I think this topic is interesting, but you quoted this yourself in another comment:
According to philosophical materialism, mind and consciousness are caused by physical processes, such as the neurochemistry of the human brain and nervous system
While not fully proven as the seat of consciousness, those mechanical processes are heavily studied and documented. It's not the mystery to materialists that you make it out to be. Your implication of "How come I can think and a rock can't? Nobody knows!" is completely false. Our bodies are composed of the same atoms and molecules as the sun. Why don't we make sunlight?!
Our bodies are composed of the same atoms and molecules as the sun. Why don't we make sunlight?!
The degree to which we understand nuclear processes and the degree to which we understand consciousness are literally multiple orders of magnitude off from each other.
Obviously no one needs to do anything. I posted a discussion piece though, you’d think some people would be up to actually discuss as opposed to just h8n
He doesn't need to elaborate on the conventionally accepted theory
What even is this “conventionally accepted theory”? No ones named one yet. One could imagine you’re referring to the theory of consciousness as an epiphenomena of the interaction of unconscious matter? Regardless of the specific one you identify, the point is that none of these are “conventionally accepted” - its known as the “Hard Problem” precisely because there is no conventionally accepted theory.
Here’s another lecture on the idea and the accompanying description:
That's not how that works
Lol
But seriously, have you got any thoughts on how consciousness arises from/in unconscious matter? I think people would be interested in that no matter their stance on panpsychism. It’s not called the Hard Problem for nothing.
He doesn't need to elaborate on the conventionally accepted theory. That's your responsibility to research and know when discussing alternatives. I think this topic is interesting, but you quoted this yourself in another comment:
While not fully proven as the seat of consciousness, those mechanical processes are heavily studied and documented. It's not the mystery to materialists that you make it out to be. Your implication of "How come I can think and a rock can't? Nobody knows!" is completely false. Our bodies are composed of the same atoms and molecules as the sun. Why don't we make sunlight?!
The degree to which we understand nuclear processes and the degree to which we understand consciousness are literally multiple orders of magnitude off from each other.
Obviously no one needs to do anything. I posted a discussion piece though, you’d think some people would be up to actually discuss as opposed to just h8n
What even is this “conventionally accepted theory”? No ones named one yet. One could imagine you’re referring to the theory of consciousness as an epiphenomena of the interaction of unconscious matter? Regardless of the specific one you identify, the point is that none of these are “conventionally accepted” - its known as the “Hard Problem” precisely because there is no conventionally accepted theory.
H2O and OH- have the same atoms, but are completely different. That's not how atoms and molecules work.
Where 👏 does 👏 consciousness 👏 come 👏 from 👏 then 👏 genius 👏
Why won't my silicone spatula compute as fast as a 4090?!
I know, it must be magic.