Say this other world has trees. Our conception of a tree is bound to our conscious experience of trees; therefore one projects information from their conscious experience onto the supposedly consciiosness-free world.
So I think the best and most clear point is that one cannot conceive of a world without consciousness. When we make claims about a world without consciousness, our conscious experience of this world is entangled with that claim.
Thank you for that, Corey. The constant 'sand bagging' must be really frustrating for you--I hope my comments do just the opposite, that is: solicit the fleshing out, or fulfillment of, what was (always) asking to be uncovered, explicated, laid out, spoken, thought, expressed, articulated, what have you.
By 'infinite past' I just meant: w/o consciousness there is no time & thus no time for a 'beginning' of time, but only an eternal past, a past that has never been present. Not (dis)agreeing
We experience all of the things you mentioned because we evolved to, the ability for us to experience light waves and sound had the cost of billions of precursor lifeforms.
It will also pass, in a relatively short time compared to the "life" of the universe, we know this thanks to science what we don't know is that the universe is logically completed by the emergence of conciousness.
And I can imagine a world independant of thought, it'd be like a world without me which will occur.
@BeardedBill86 To go further, is the universe still complete if you remove every sentient being except one? When the universe exists with only one observer what happens to that completeness when that one becomes none?
How do you know you have great great grandparents? Records and logic tell you you must, but you're not aware of it, you can't remember it,does this relegate it to the realm of imagination?
No, it doesn't and neither does the lack of conciousness eliminate existance.
So, if Conscious and hence “assumed reality” can be changed and reduced by half in response to losing half brain, then, I think reality can be changed “increase or decrease” based on this logic, and hence then reality is a Conscious made.
Lets take it in another way, when there is a stroke to the RT side of the brain or by removing that sphere, Individual become unaware of the left half of anything that exist.
It is not they cant see it, no, it is for them DOSE NOT exist, they are totally unaware of it, Unconscious in a sense, also unaware of the fact there is this other part that they are unaware of no matter how much you try to tell them.
From studying the genetic code on the atomic and sub atomic level, to fractal geometry providing the structures for everything living and inanimate, it does seem life and consciousness do have a sort of inevitability. When I here the point of view suggesting that a universe coming about ideal for life and consciousness through an evolutionary Darwinist means along the lines of natural selection, I can not help but think, “just like any other living creature”
@AfterFauve001 also there seems to me an ugly little piece of the puzzle in physics that physicists steer clear of called “dimension”. Instead of acknowledging extra dimensions as an active force, new particles and materials are thrown in to explain causes & effects including dark matter and dark energy which to me sounds like another form of luminiferous aether
conciousness emerged as did nature and life forms emerged there is not a "could not have" because it did and it is...that is precisely the logic and intuition of the now or being aware of the now.I think conciousness and language emerged in a sybiotic process however I am reluctant to say it was because of necessity when one looks back to the past regarding the hominoids it seems like a necessity but it remains to be something totally human and something with undefined parameters and directions.
@HigherPlanes yea Corey? Or are you saying that consciousness is beyond causality or Beyond empirical study? are you claiming consciousness is normative (which is, in a sense, is beyond causality)? I say this b/c I have been grappling with this very issue. Could it be that this understanding yr talking about here is a prior or just a powerful normative belief (maybe the most powerful)? is this postmodern (Wittgensteinian / Heideggerian) robust holism unjustified? -bluetoebeing
What we see is just simply electromagnetic signals.. so we can't even be sure we are actually living in a material universe. If we are, than I still don't think you have any basis for suggesting that matter couldn't possible exist without consciousness. Leaping to the conclusion that matter needs to be observed is absurd, because we don't know. Just like an attempt at creating an all powerful creator, logic can't prove this to be true, because our understanding is not yet great enough.
Thier problem is that the leap from a materialism to consciousness fails to be explained. Materialist theories don't predict consciousness. But it's quite easy to start with consciousness and predict that materialism would be one outcome.
Human consciousness will always think the ultimate goal is/was consciousness. Understandable being our condition. Logically. But it still is a flat earth, geocentric model of the universe concept. I think therefore me, me, me , ME. It's instinctual to think this way. But I can't tell it apart from a theistic centric model.
The idea that life and our consciousness sprung out of random events is the hardest and most counter-intuitive concept our minds reluctantly have to deal with. Not instinctual
This bold confidence in disagreement against p.anton is strange (&quite revealing). I mean the issues we are discussing here are on the fringe of life itself, lets put our egos aside boys&girls.Ok, Anton the last min. of the: consciousness of nature video is awesome&I would be happy if you would untangle the notion of imagination as reality concept & point to a few books on this topic.Q:I have a feeling that what yr after here (&in alot of yr vids) is about this 1 inescapable a prior assumption?
@professoranton have you read Julian Jaynes The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind? I'm super interested in hearing your opinions on it
@sensorysalad It is a fascinating and interesting but mostly speculative book. Walter Ong treats it quite favorably and brings a more robust and, in my vies, more tenable position within his wonderful book Orality and Literacy.
Ask this question... where does the mechanical part of you end and your consciousness begin?...
If you chop off your hand... you consciousness still exists..
If you were able to keep your brain alive in a jar and delve into the complex neural interactions in your brain... Is the squishy electrical cascading chemical discharges relaying information back and forth consciousness?
Are we really just some sort of self contained microscopic electrical chemical storm?
1. I do not make the realist-imaginationist mistake. "Things there exist independent of any ability to comprehend them." Since "there" refers to a conceivable universe in which matter never arranged itself in such a way as to become conscious, it is by stipulation that things there exist independent of any ability to comprehend them (b/c no comprehend-ers exist). You must know it is wrongheaded to ask for evidence that life could have not emerged. Neither of our claims are really empirical.
@TheRedHutt 2. I'm not claiming that a lifeless world is the real world. "No one has ever known a world in which there wasn't consciousness." This is trivially, tautologically true. Similarly, consciousness seems necessary for logic, but logic seems contingent on consciousness, which itself seems contingent. My lifeless world is conceivable and seems entirely possible. The orderliness of the universe may be wholly dependent on conscious order-ers (we're in no position to tell).
Thanks professor, your perception of such things is rather complex for my understandings, though "consciousness" in my 'definition manual' refers to awareness and as such there is only really NOW, anything else is or could be said to be a recording after the fact and that, in the context I guess you are speaking of here, consciousness exists as a recording of all our awareness' combined, "the unified field" perhaps.
in my experience yes, anything anyone wants to believe exists as belief to them.
@mistaAnthonyWilson Even if "Reality" is always NOW, the NOW makes room for more than itself; it, at least as far as life goes, is an elongated stretch that tarries and awaits.
Corey, most people that think their conscious, are in fact unconscious. Being unable to think outside of their conditioned bubbles is an impossiblitly until they have a consciousness expanding experience. Consciousness is about more than the universe being able to experience it self through us (the most highly developed creation of evolution), it is about seeing through the illusion, that most of us consider objective reality.
I know what you mean Corey, it's like those times that you think "I wish I had done that differently then", when it's your imagination you fall into and not the fact of the matter. You couldn't have done it differently, because that's how your world unfolded.
In future times you'll be able to act differently, just like we could choose to erase all consciousness from the face of the planet. But it couldn't have developed differently until this present day. At least; not in this dimension ;)
@2bsirius I guess I think that you're conflating 1>.kinds and varieties of consciousness/awareness (which I believe is stochastic) with 2>. the sheer FACT OF awareness (which I believe is not).
Why don't you give, as clearly as you can, what you think is a non-anthropic, or non-anthropocentric view, and then we'll see how well it stands up.
"The anthropic principle is the philosophical argument that observations of the physical Universe must be compatible with the conscious life that observes it. Some proponents of the argument reason that it explains why the Universe has the age and the fundamental physical constants necessary to accommodate conscious life."
There are strong and weak varieties of the anthropic. Yours might be the strong variety? Don't want to put words in ur mouth.
Materialists are imaginativists? Yes, that makes sense, strange as it seems to say it.
bryher2 3 months ago
Say this other world has trees. Our conception of a tree is bound to our conscious experience of trees; therefore one projects information from their conscious experience onto the supposedly consciiosness-free world.
atheoexistentialist 9 months ago
So I think the best and most clear point is that one cannot conceive of a world without consciousness. When we make claims about a world without consciousness, our conscious experience of this world is entangled with that claim.
atheoexistentialist 9 months ago
Thank you for that, Corey. The constant 'sand bagging' must be really frustrating for you--I hope my comments do just the opposite, that is: solicit the fleshing out, or fulfillment of, what was (always) asking to be uncovered, explicated, laid out, spoken, thought, expressed, articulated, what have you.
By 'infinite past' I just meant: w/o consciousness there is no time & thus no time for a 'beginning' of time, but only an eternal past, a past that has never been present. Not (dis)agreeing
emblemOFbeing 10 months ago
We experience all of the things you mentioned because we evolved to, the ability for us to experience light waves and sound had the cost of billions of precursor lifeforms.
It will also pass, in a relatively short time compared to the "life" of the universe, we know this thanks to science what we don't know is that the universe is logically completed by the emergence of conciousness.
And I can imagine a world independant of thought, it'd be like a world without me which will occur.
BeardedBill86 10 months ago
@BeardedBill86 To go further, is the universe still complete if you remove every sentient being except one? When the universe exists with only one observer what happens to that completeness when that one becomes none?
How do you know you have great great grandparents? Records and logic tell you you must, but you're not aware of it, you can't remember it,does this relegate it to the realm of imagination?
No, it doesn't and neither does the lack of conciousness eliminate existance.
BeardedBill86 10 months ago
(2-2)
So, if Conscious and hence “assumed reality” can be changed and reduced by half in response to losing half brain, then, I think reality can be changed “increase or decrease” based on this logic, and hence then reality is a Conscious made.
spherocyte 11 months ago
(1-2)
Consciousness
Lets take it in another way, when there is a stroke to the RT side of the brain or by removing that sphere, Individual become unaware of the left half of anything that exist.
It is not they cant see it, no, it is for them DOSE NOT exist, they are totally unaware of it, Unconscious in a sense, also unaware of the fact there is this other part that they are unaware of no matter how much you try to tell them.
spherocyte 11 months ago
From studying the genetic code on the atomic and sub atomic level, to fractal geometry providing the structures for everything living and inanimate, it does seem life and consciousness do have a sort of inevitability. When I here the point of view suggesting that a universe coming about ideal for life and consciousness through an evolutionary Darwinist means along the lines of natural selection, I can not help but think, “just like any other living creature”
AfterFauve001 11 months ago
@AfterFauve001 also there seems to me an ugly little piece of the puzzle in physics that physicists steer clear of called “dimension”. Instead of acknowledging extra dimensions as an active force, new particles and materials are thrown in to explain causes & effects including dark matter and dark energy which to me sounds like another form of luminiferous aether
AfterFauve001 11 months ago
conciousness emerged as did nature and life forms emerged there is not a "could not have" because it did and it is...that is precisely the logic and intuition of the now or being aware of the now.I think conciousness and language emerged in a sybiotic process however I am reluctant to say it was because of necessity when one looks back to the past regarding the hominoids it seems like a necessity but it remains to be something totally human and something with undefined parameters and directions.
f1ghtclub2k3 11 months ago
OK so you are saying the pet theory advanced by a catholic priest is wrong
unless you add in the diety in some form.BIG Bang = let there be light.
Otherwise you get the primordial plasma and not a scrap of anything else in sight.
At this time we have a bunch of monkeys using an emotional processor and
calling it " consciouness" claiming it permeates all space and time.
It does not compute !
tyrbolo 11 months ago
Doesn't the quantum observer effect prove your point about consciousness always having been there, Corey?
HigherPlanes 11 months ago
@HigherPlanes yea Corey? Or are you saying that consciousness is beyond causality or Beyond empirical study? are you claiming consciousness is normative (which is, in a sense, is beyond causality)? I say this b/c I have been grappling with this very issue. Could it be that this understanding yr talking about here is a prior or just a powerful normative belief (maybe the most powerful)? is this postmodern (Wittgensteinian / Heideggerian) robust holism unjustified? -bluetoebeing
bluetoebeing 11 months ago
What we see is just simply electromagnetic signals.. so we can't even be sure we are actually living in a material universe. If we are, than I still don't think you have any basis for suggesting that matter couldn't possible exist without consciousness. Leaping to the conclusion that matter needs to be observed is absurd, because we don't know. Just like an attempt at creating an all powerful creator, logic can't prove this to be true, because our understanding is not yet great enough.
ONLYBESTVlDEOSFORYOU 11 months ago
Thier problem is that the leap from a materialism to consciousness fails to be explained. Materialist theories don't predict consciousness. But it's quite easy to start with consciousness and predict that materialism would be one outcome.
beechgrovejoe 11 months ago
Hey prof, did you catch SisyphusRedeemed's video lecture on determinism and free will? Would love to hear your comments on it.
fractal420 11 months ago
Human consciousness will always think the ultimate goal is/was consciousness. Understandable being our condition. Logically. But it still is a flat earth, geocentric model of the universe concept. I think therefore me, me, me , ME. It's instinctual to think this way. But I can't tell it apart from a theistic centric model.
The idea that life and our consciousness sprung out of random events is the hardest and most counter-intuitive concept our minds reluctantly have to deal with. Not instinctual
mku17ra 11 months ago
For me, the important thing to realise is, not only do we not know, but we cannot know, in any definitive conceptual way.
Great spiritual minds have been saying this for thousands of years.
& whether some people know/accept it or not, those minds were ALL ABOUT REALITY.
TWITfromURANUS 11 months ago
@TWITfromURANUS "Great spiritual minds have been saying this for thousands of years." Agreed.
Professoranton 11 months ago
This bold confidence in disagreement against p.anton is strange (&quite revealing). I mean the issues we are discussing here are on the fringe of life itself, lets put our egos aside boys&girls.Ok, Anton the last min. of the: consciousness of nature video is awesome&I would be happy if you would untangle the notion of imagination as reality concept & point to a few books on this topic.Q:I have a feeling that what yr after here (&in alot of yr vids) is about this 1 inescapable a prior assumption?
bluetoebeing 11 months ago
Comment removed
thesunshon 11 months ago
@thesunshon what the fuck are you talking about!
bluetoebeing 11 months ago
@bluetoebeing I think he/she might be talking about this: watch?v=YqQasoWm7Kg
TWITfromURANUS 11 months ago
@bluetoebeing
exactly lol
thesunshon 11 months ago
@thesunshon No i'm sorry, I understand what your talking about.
bluetoebeing 11 months ago
@bluetoebeing
COOL SCHOOL! PEACE!
thesunshon 11 months ago
Introducing Kant to materialists is like shooting fish in a barrel.
brokennarcissist 11 months ago
@professoranton have you read Julian Jaynes The Origin of Conciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind? I'm super interested in hearing your opinions on it
sensorysalad 11 months ago
@sensorysalad It is a fascinating and interesting but mostly speculative book. Walter Ong treats it quite favorably and brings a more robust and, in my vies, more tenable position within his wonderful book Orality and Literacy.
Professoranton 11 months ago
Mars doesn't have consciousness.
georgemc25 11 months ago
The universe is awaking to itself eternally = )
2ruthfox82 11 months ago
Ask this question... where does the mechanical part of you end and your consciousness begin?...
If you chop off your hand... you consciousness still exists..
If you were able to keep your brain alive in a jar and delve into the complex neural interactions in your brain... Is the squishy electrical cascading chemical discharges relaying information back and forth consciousness?
Are we really just some sort of self contained microscopic electrical chemical storm?
batfly 11 months ago
It is my understanding, all matter and energy, seemingly void of consciousness, is actually comprised of the fabric of consciousness.
There is no such thing as matter being separate from consciousness. There is only the illusion of separation.
batfly 11 months ago
...In other words...
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
batfly 11 months ago
@batfly you gotta break out of this realist/idealist dichotomy man.
bluetoebeing 11 months ago
1. I do not make the realist-imaginationist mistake. "Things there exist independent of any ability to comprehend them." Since "there" refers to a conceivable universe in which matter never arranged itself in such a way as to become conscious, it is by stipulation that things there exist independent of any ability to comprehend them (b/c no comprehend-ers exist). You must know it is wrongheaded to ask for evidence that life could have not emerged. Neither of our claims are really empirical.
TheRedHutt 11 months ago
@TheRedHutt 2. I'm not claiming that a lifeless world is the real world. "No one has ever known a world in which there wasn't consciousness." This is trivially, tautologically true. Similarly, consciousness seems necessary for logic, but logic seems contingent on consciousness, which itself seems contingent. My lifeless world is conceivable and seems entirely possible. The orderliness of the universe may be wholly dependent on conscious order-ers (we're in no position to tell).
TheRedHutt 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2:40- 2:50 thumbs up.
TheWandgirl 11 months ago
Thanks professor, your perception of such things is rather complex for my understandings, though "consciousness" in my 'definition manual' refers to awareness and as such there is only really NOW, anything else is or could be said to be a recording after the fact and that, in the context I guess you are speaking of here, consciousness exists as a recording of all our awareness' combined, "the unified field" perhaps.
in my experience yes, anything anyone wants to believe exists as belief to them.
mistaAnthonyWilson 11 months ago
@mistaAnthonyWilson Even if "Reality" is always NOW, the NOW makes room for more than itself; it, at least as far as life goes, is an elongated stretch that tarries and awaits.
Professoranton 11 months ago
@Professoranton you speak of expectation there, another matter altogether perhaps
mistaAnthonyWilson 11 months ago
Corey, most people that think their conscious, are in fact unconscious. Being unable to think outside of their conditioned bubbles is an impossiblitly until they have a consciousness expanding experience. Consciousness is about more than the universe being able to experience it self through us (the most highly developed creation of evolution), it is about seeing through the illusion, that most of us consider objective reality.
doesthismakeanysense 11 months ago
I know what you mean Corey, it's like those times that you think "I wish I had done that differently then", when it's your imagination you fall into and not the fact of the matter. You couldn't have done it differently, because that's how your world unfolded.
In future times you'll be able to act differently, just like we could choose to erase all consciousness from the face of the planet. But it couldn't have developed differently until this present day. At least; not in this dimension ;)
jaikook 11 months ago
time is natures way from keeping everything from happening at once ...
spellgrounds 11 months ago
I appreciate the clarification...BUT I still have some questions...
Your argument seems a bit like a restatement of the anthropic principle to me, but that could be because I'm still lost...
I have the same misgivings about the anthropic argument and yours...
It seems a little tautological:
Consciousness exists because we have consciousness and it is through this consciousness we apprehend the world?
2bsirius 11 months ago
@2bsirius I guess I think that you're conflating 1>.kinds and varieties of consciousness/awareness (which I believe is stochastic) with 2>. the sheer FACT OF awareness (which I believe is not).
Why don't you give, as clearly as you can, what you think is a non-anthropic, or non-anthropocentric view, and then we'll see how well it stands up.
Professoranton 11 months ago
@Professoranton
Wiki snatch for clarification:
"The anthropic principle is the philosophical argument that observations of the physical Universe must be compatible with the conscious life that observes it. Some proponents of the argument reason that it explains why the Universe has the age and the fundamental physical constants necessary to accommodate conscious life."
There are strong and weak varieties of the anthropic. Yours might be the strong variety? Don't want to put words in ur mouth.
2bsirius 11 months ago
LAST!
KingCold1999 11 months ago