Rocks have consciousness? Common Sense not needed? Evolutionism at any cost?

[stevevw]

Are you saying that "the state of being" is a form of consciousness? So then a container of table salt knows that it is in a state of being? It seems to me that the inanimate state of being precludes any form of consciousness, so then no ability to know anything at all.

A state of being is just being something. I am not saying things like salt or rocks are conscious like humans but I think there may be degrees of consciousness begining with a very rudimentary consciousness which is existing in some state as opposed to other states within the whole. These states interact with other states which are all embued with a basic form of consciousness about other states and conditions around them.

I think this makes sense because it seems even the quantum world seems to behave like there is some intention involved. Not consciously choosing to act but automatically reacting and responding to other states in a way that is aware of other phenomena in the world.

I think this is an under developed area of research and though I don't necessarily agree with ideas like Panpsychism and IIT theory I think the basic idea that consciousness is fundemental makes sense and solves some of the problems that Standard models face especially in unifying QM and Classical physics.

I also makes sense because I think all of Gods creation is a fallen state and therefore are constantly trying to find stability from chaos striving for that perfect state to be in harmony with an unfallen state in which everything is created to be.

 

[BobRyan]

It's not reacting to chemical stimuli. They only placed down some food, the slime did the rest.

If your hungry and someone places a sandwich infront of you. You will reach for it.

I don't think slime "sees" anything. It is all chemical stimuli at that point

 

[BobRyan]

A state of being is just being something. I am not saying things like salt or rocks are conscious like humans but I think there may be degrees of consciousness begining with a very rudimentary consciousness which is existing in some state

Ok so now in the case of a container of table salt we have an inanimate object and nothing in it decides, or detects then chooses etc.

Consciousness " state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings:"
Consciousness, at its simplest, is sentience and awareness of internal and external existence

Inanimate objects are neither awake, nor aware.

as opposed to other states within the whole. These states interact with other states which are all embued with a basic form of consciousness about other states

Inanimate objects are not aware of any states - not even their own present state.

I am guessing you are talking about 'redefining the term' and then in its redefined state seeing if it can apply to inanimate objects.

So what is the "new definition" you want to use for the term? (without using the term itself as part of its own definition)

If I redefine the term to mean "being in the state of an inanimate rock regardless of size" then I am simply saying it is an element in nature. As long as everything is made up of something that appears on the periodic chart - then by my new definition for "Consciousness" everything has consciousness. The problem with that is that it turns the term into meaninglessness in terms of our current existing concept of consciousness.

 

[ronlion]

Bob, some scientists say that plants have brains.
Scientists Discover Plants Have "Brains" That Determine When They Grow
I guess we will all have to deal with vegetable rights groups someday. But seriously only humans- and the Bible predicted this- have Inno-Intelligence. Only humans have the super intelligence needed to truly innovate! Because we are made in the image of God: and God creates. Atheism is proven demonstrably false -again!

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, some scientists say that plants have brains.
Scientists Discover Plants Have "Brains" That Determine When They Grow
I guess we will all have to deal with vegetable rights groups someday. But seriously only humans- and the Bible predicted this- have Inno-Intelligence. Only humans have the super intelligence needed to truly innovate! Because we are made in the image of God: and God creates. Atheism is proven demonstrably false -again!

Depends on how they redefine terms --
In the above example
1. No brain stem
2. No Cerebral cortex
3. No visual cortex
4. No neurons ( so does not even qualify as a spinal cord)

If you downsize the term enough a lot of things can be said to have that kind of downsized "brain"

 

[The Liturgist]

I believe exactly what Gen 1 says:

Genesis 1:11 KJV
11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

What brought forth the grass?

Genesis 1:20 KJV
20. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

What brought forth the sea creatures and air creatures?

Genesis 1:24 KJV
24. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

What brought forth the living creature of the earth?

God spoke words into the dirt and water of the earth, empowering them with all that was needed to bring forth life. This is His life bringing forth factory. I feel completely comfortable in believing and confessing that God empowered the earth and seas to bring forth life, because that is what this says.

Indeed. Genesis 1 is unique among the creation accounts provided by the religions of the world because it agrees with evolution and cosmology as understood by astrophysics.

That said I am not personally a fan of the panpsychism idea, although I believe all that is in the universe to be created by God directly or through his creations, like humans, or moths, or beavers.

 

[BobRyan]

Indeed. Genesis 1 is unique among the creation accounts provided by the religions of the world because it agrees with evolution

Not true.

No evolution text insists that all plants on Earth came into being before the sun
No evolution text says God made man in His own image

I don't know of any evolution texts that insist that birds evolved on land before land animals. Rather they argue that birds came from very large land animals theropod dinosaurs

I don't know of any evolution text that claims that plants came about in a single rotation of Earth - a single evening and morning.

 

[stevevw]

Ok so now in the case of a container of table salt we have an inanimate object and nothing in it decides, or detects then chooses etc.

Consciousness " state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings:"
Consciousness, at its simplest, is sentience and awareness of internal and external existence

Inanimate objects are neither awake, nor aware.

Some say at the fundemental level in Quantum mechanics even electrons have Mind like qualities. That particles exist in superpositions and it takes a measurement and observer to create the reality we experience. So in some ways perhaps Mind is fundemental to everything.

Inanimate objects are not aware of any states - not even their own present state.
I am guessing you are talking about 'redefining the term' and then in its redefined state seeing if it can apply to inanimate objects.

So what is the "new definition" you want to use for the term? (without using the term itself as part of its own definition)

If I redefine the term to mean "being in the state of an inanimate rock regardless of size" then I am simply saying it is an element in nature. As long as everything is made up of something that appears on the periodic chart - then by my new definition for "Consciousness" everything has consciousness. The problem with that is that it turns the term into meaninglessness in terms of our current existing concept of consciousness.

In QM it seems particles have a rudimentary awareness in that they can communicate non locally with other particles effecting their behaviour. If it takes an observer and Mind to create reality (fix those particles into particular position as opposed to any position) and fundemental particles can be influenced by the Mind of the oberserver then these particles also have to exist in Mind like states.

 

[BobRyan]

Some say at the fundemental level in Quantum mechanics even electrons have Mind like qualities.

IF we downsize the meaning of 'intelligence' to a sufficiently meaningless level then water has the intelligence to "Flow down hill" and to always choose the path that will lead to a downhill result when it is available.

Deleting the meaning of words just to hijack them for use outside of contexts where they would normally apply makes the term pretty much meaningless.

In QM it seems particles have a rudimentary awareness in that they can communicate non locally with other particles effecting their behaviour.

That's like saying that the nucleus communicates with its electron shells to fill them ...

Its a misuse of the term if we are talking about intelligence..

If it takes an observer and Mind to create reality (fix those particles into particular position as opposed to any position) and fundemental particles can be influenced by the Mind of the oberserver then these particles also have to exist in Mind like states.

That "IF" is not "a given".

 

[stevevw]

IF we downsize the meaning of 'intelligence' to a sufficiently meaningless level then water has the intelligence to "Flow down hill" and to always choose the path that will lead to a downhill result when it is available.

Deleting the meaning of words just to hijack them for use outside of contexts where they would normally apply makes the term pretty much meaningless.


That's like saying that the nucleus communicates with its electron shells to fill them ...

Its a misuse of the term if we are talking about intelligence..

That "IF" is not "a given".

But we are not talking about intelligence but something more fundemental. At this level there is no components to communicate with each other but rather waves of potentiality and it is Mind that is creating the reality we percieve as electrons and water. This idea has strong support and arguement such as from Wigner and Wheelers experiements so its not just a misuse of words or meanings.

 

[BobRyan]

But we are not talking about intelligence but something more fundemental.

According to the thread title - we are talking about consciousness. Something that inanimate objects like rocks and salt and electrons do not have.

rather waves of potentiality

We are talking about consciousness which goes far beyond magnetic fields, quantum flux, gravitational effects of gravity or quantum entanglement

it is Mind that is creating the reality

our Mind is what we use to perceive our environment. But we are not an electron or a photon.

 

[BobRyan]

This idea has strong support and arguement such as from Wigner and Wheelers experiements so its not just a misuse of words or meanings.

It is more like saying "an interesting story" when you say "support and argument" for electrons and photons being conscious.

It is like saying that trees have intelligent minds and listing some examples of how they react to changes in environment.

Using such limited and downsized concepts of consciousness - a corpse is still conscious and the question "is the patient still conscious" is like asking "do they still have electrons". I am not talking about that level of meaninglessness for the term "conscious".

 

[FenderTL5]

“Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!” And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to him, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples.” He answered, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out.”

 

[stevevw]

It is more like saying "an interesting story" when you say "support and argument" for electrons and photons being conscious.

Yes but its not really a story like say a fable or Fiction, but rather empiracle science as far as I understand it.

It is like saying that trees have intelligent minds and listing some examples of how they react to changes in environment.

Using such limited and downsized concepts of consciousness - a corpse is still conscious and the question "is the patient still conscious" is like asking "do they still have electrons". I am not talking about that level of meaninglessness for the term "conscious".

But isn't the idea that consciousness and Mind goes on after the physical death and is present in the universe the basis for most ideas about consciousness beyond brain like Panpsychism, Quantum Bayesianism, Christianity, Buddhism ect. I don't think these ideas are regarded as a story or even controversial for that matter. In fact Panpsychism is becoming quite popular in mainstream science.

I agree theres a lot we don't know and I'm not saying these ideas have any rock solid support but rather hypothesizing that there may be some merit to them or at least the idea that consciousness and Mind is fundemental.

It seems consciousness has two broad positions. Its either an epiphenomena or its siomething beyond the physical brain and fundemental to reality. Its still the old Mind and Body debate which has been around for 100's of years. Consciousness beyond brain lost favor with Enlightenment and the scientific revolution. But it seems to be coming back in favor with many new theories some sound promising.

The point is I think that something along the lines of consciousness beyond brain is required to explain what we are finding in QM. Either that or we may be part of a Multiverse which seems to me even more far fetched. But I don't think we are going to find any hidden variables or solve the problems within the Standard Model with Classical ways of thinking. Thats why some say treating Consciousness as fundemental will allow us to progress further than ever before.