The Evolution of Consciousness

[juvenissun]

brain development.

Do we ever study fossilized brain? Or you simply go by size, which could only be a consequence, not a reason.

Large dog smarter than small dog?

 

[Tayla]

We also see greater or lesser degrees of consciousness among animals (including us).

Even as a Christian I agree with most of science. But there are a few things about materialism that don't seem right. One concerns consciousness.

Consciousness is not material in the same way as matter, energy, and the fundamental forces. Calling it an emergent property doesn't help because these are merely categories of the mind, not things in themselves. And calling consciousness merely an illusion doesn't help.

Yes, consciousness correlates with brains structure and function. But consciousness is outside this material universe while at the same time interacting closely with it, perhaps via some sort of quantum mechanical process.

 

[Jimmy D]

If Neanderthals wore clothes, they ARE human.

Do Caddisfly larvae wear clothes? What about decorator Crabs?

 

[juvenissun]

Do Caddisfly larvae wear clothes? What about decorator Crabs?

They do not evolved from apes.

 

[Jimmy D]

They do not evolved from apes.

It's an answer.... but to a question I didn't ask.

Do Caddisfly larvae wear clothes?

 

[juvenissun]

It's an answer.... but to a question I didn't ask.

Do Caddisfly larvae wear clothes?

No.

 

[PsychoSarah]

If Neanderthals wore clothes, they ARE human. DNA does not matter.

Behold these "humans"!
https://www.whatsthatbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/casemaking_clothes_moth_canada.jpg Casemaking clothes moth larva make and wear clothing themselves, and they are not purely bodily excretions.

https://draugies.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/caddisfly-larva.jpg Caddisfly larva

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a7c24e0f00cdc166801245e6131a16de.webp Assassin bugs wear the bodies of their victims

I am also very tempted to post a picture of a nudist and declare it a chimp, but the rules of this site and my own aversion to nudity will not allow it.

Taxonomy is not good enough. Both can NOT explain the behavior, which is a symptom of a far more important criterion.

Too bad for you that a variety of organisms do make and wear clothing. Heck, hermit crabs don't make the shells they use, but they are rather choosy about which ones they wear. Many organisms wear other objects to blend in or protect themselves from the environment, and most of the ones I find are so far removed from human that it is truly mind boggling that you'd think wearing clothes is some sort of grand distinction between humans and everything else.

Evolutionists said, human evolved from ape. If so, why do we lose our fur/hair?

I already answered this question, don't pretend I didn't have a huge explanation about it. Even today, there are places where people can be comfortably nude and survive just fine, as well as many creatures aside from ourselves that currently don't have fur but had furry ancestors. Why are you so focused on this?

 

[PsychoSarah]

No.

Why not? They make a case around themselves of items that do not come from their own bodies, so what makes that "not clothes" and the shirt I am wearing "clothes"?

 

[juvenissun]

Behold these "humans"!
https://www.whatsthatbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/casemaking_clothes_moth_canada.jpg Casemaking clothes moth larva make and wear clothing themselves, and they are not purely bodily excretions.

https://draugies.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/caddisfly-larva.jpg Caddisfly larva

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a7c24e0f00cdc166801245e6131a16de.webp Assassin bugs wear the bodies of their victims

I am also very tempted to post a picture of a nudist and declare it a chimp, but the rules of this site and my own aversion to nudity will not allow it.


Too bad for you that a variety of organisms do make and wear clothing. Heck, hermit crabs don't make the shells they use, but they are rather choosy about which ones they wear. Many organisms wear other objects to blend in or protect themselves from the environment, and most of the ones I find are so far removed from human that it is truly mind boggling that you'd think wearing clothes is some sort of grand distinction between humans and everything else.

The right way to deal with my "clothing" argument is to ask: What is the function of clothes. Too bad no one even bother to ask that, until this issue barely touches the edge of it.

Wearing clothes is NOT just to cover the body with something. The key question is why bother to do that? Animals in your examples need shelters for safety reason. That is good. But human wear clothes is not for that purpose. So animal shells are not clothes.

A side point: not all, but most soft-body animals do not try to find existed shell to cover their body. So, in the ToE, your examples are very powerful examples that illustrate evolution can not explain this strange behavior. This is just a reminder. I don't wish to open a discussion on this topic now. The ToE is FULL of HOLES.

 

[juvenissun]

Why not? They make a case around themselves of items that do not come from their own bodies, so what makes that "not clothes" and the shirt I am wearing "clothes"?

Just following your argument: human DOES make their own clothes (even you don't).
This could be taken as a minor answer to the question.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

Even as a Christian I agree with most of science. But there are a few things about materialism that don't seem right. One concerns consciousness.

Consciousness is not material in the same way as matter, energy, and the fundamental forces. Calling it an emergent property doesn't help because these are merely categories of the mind, not things in themselves. And calling consciousness merely an illusion doesn't help.

Yes, consciousness correlates with brains structure and function. But consciousness is outside this material universe while at the same time interacting closely with it, perhaps via some sort of quantum mechanical process.

You make a very strong claim in the bolded bit. How would you back up that claim?

There is evidence that consciousness has a physical basis. E.g. both physical trauma and psychoactive drugs can affect consciousness. If consciousness is not physical, then why do drugs that affect the transmissions of chemical neurotransmitters between physical cell neurones have such an effect on it.

 

[Tayla]

You make a very strong claim in the bolded bit. How would you back up that claim?

There is evidence that consciousness has a physical basis. E.g. both physical trauma and psychoactive drugs can affect consciousness. If consciousness is not physical, then why do drugs that affect the transmissions of chemical neurotransmitters between physical cell neurones have such an effect on it.

Yes, consciousness is tightly correlated with brain function, perhaps even generated in some way by brain function. But the subjective experience of consciousness is not material. (I think, therefore I am.)

Similar to life. At conception, a soul from the spiritual realm is created and associates to the single cell which develops to become a person. But the soul is not material.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

Yes, consciousness is tightly correlated with brain function, perhaps even generated in some way by brain function. But the subjective experience of consciousness is not material. (I think, therefore I am.)

Again, which seems to be a pattern, you discuss consciousness in the first sentence here, but then make a strong unsupported claim in the second.

How do you know that the subjective experience of consciousness is not material? I don't see how 'I think, therefore I am' supports this. Could you please explain your reasoning?

Similar to life. At conception, a soul from the spiritual realm is created and associates to the single cell which develops to become a person. But the soul is not material.

This is a strong claim. How do you know that this is true?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Yes, consciousness is tightly correlated with brain function, perhaps even generated in some way by brain function. But the subjective experience of consciousness is not material. (I think, therefore I am.)

All that subjective stuff, still happens in the material brain.

Similar to life. At conception, a soul from the spiritual realm is created and associates to the single cell which develops to become a person. But the soul is not material.

Prove it. Demonstrate the existance of this sould. Demonstrate the "injection" of it in the single cell.