Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
Gertie
Posts: 2181
Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Gertie »

Halc wrote: August 15th, 2018, 9:47 pm
Tamminen wrote: August 15th, 2018, 8:11 am But I am speaking of a situation where this world of ours does not exist, but the world without subjects could exist instead. And I am saying that it cannot exist.
We're well aware that you are saying this. But this is simply your premise, not a conclusion drawn from evidence or logic or anything.
My understanding of Tam's position is that it's a big picture whole cloth 'What if...' hypothesis.

It doesn't 'follow the evidence' and there's no logical formulation which gets him there.

So we're left with it 'feeling like it makes sense' because... without experiencing Subjects, there's no knowledge or meaning.


The ontological step from No Knowing, to Nothing Existing To Be Known, thereby becomes what he would call absurd.


This gives Subject Experiencing a much more significant role in the fundamental nature of reality, which isn't a neat fit with our traditional ways of viewing reality, which are more neatly packaged in evidence and logic.


The big fly in the ointment is the evidence that non-conscious stuff existed prior to Subjects who could experience it. In order to incorporate this evidence, which he accepts, there has to be some underlying Subject-Object Relationship which is more fundamental than the Time relationship between the two.


It's an interesting way to conceptualise the world, but it doesn't use our usual tools of evidence or logic, so persuading anyone else is really down to it 'feeling like it makes sense' to them too. It also puts it outside the usual testing grounds of evidence and logic, and makes debate frustrating. There's nothing to anchor it, no grounds to debate on, no way to test it. As an argument it stands or falls on whether it makes sense to you.
Tamminen
Posts: 1347
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Tamminen »

RJG wrote: August 16th, 2018, 6:54 am In any case, it is time for me to move on from this topic. I've enjoyed the discussions. Take care good friend.
I have enjoyed it too. Thanks.
Gertie wrote: August 16th, 2018, 8:20 am My understanding of Tam's position is that it's a big picture whole cloth 'What if...' hypothesis.

It doesn't 'follow the evidence' and there's no logical formulation which gets him there.

So we're left with it 'feeling like it makes sense' because... without experiencing Subjects, there's no knowledge or meaning.


The ontological step from No Knowing, to Nothing Existing To Be Known, thereby becomes what he would call absurd.


This gives Subject Experiencing a much more significant role in the fundamental nature of reality, which isn't a neat fit with our traditional ways of viewing reality, which are more neatly packaged in evidence and logic.


The big fly in the ointment is the evidence that non-conscious stuff existed prior to Subjects who could experience it. In order to incorporate this evidence, which he accepts, there has to be some underlying Subject-Object Relationship which is more fundamental than the Time relationship between the two.


It's an interesting way to conceptualise the world, but it doesn't use our usual tools of evidence or logic, so persuading anyone else is really down to it 'feeling like it makes sense' to them too. It also puts it outside the usual testing grounds of evidence and logic, and makes debate frustrating. There's nothing to anchor it, no grounds to debate on, no way to test it. As an argument it stands or falls on whether it makes sense to you.
Yes, it is beyond language, and cannot be reached by language. In language there is too much sound and fury. Even the kind of poetry I have sometimes used does not seem to help. So perhaps it is time to listen to the sound of silence.

But to remind those who are interested:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15258
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Felix »

The big fly in the ointment is the evidence that non-conscious stuff existed prior to Subjects who could experience it.
I don't see an issue with that, it's how things work in a temporal universe; events unfold over time, innate potential is expressed. It's only a problem if you insist that everything must have a logical explanation.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
Tamminen
Posts: 1347
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Tamminen »

Tamminen:
there would be no sense in 'existence'
Consul:
What do you mean by "sense" here?
We have an internal point of view to the world, because we belong to the world.

There is no external point of view to the world, a “God's eye” or something. All perspectives to the world are internal.

We cannot imagine ourselves looking at the world from an external viewpoint and saying: “There are no subjects!” It just makes no sense.

To say that the world without subjects is possible requires a leap from an internal viewpoint to an external viewpoint, from immanence to transcendence. It is a religious leap, and it has no justification.

If this is materialism, materialism is a religion. I am on the immanent side. Matter without the subject is transcendent, the subject is immanent.
Tamminen
Posts: 1347
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Tamminen »

The world cannot exist, because there is no reason for its existence. But it exists. Strange!

The subject must exist, because its nonexistence would be self-contradictory. But it cannot exist without the world. So the world exists for the subject.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Felix »

To say that the world without subjects is possible requires a leap from an internal viewpoint to an external viewpoint, from immanence to transcendence. It is a religious leap, and it has no justification.
Well, you can't go that far unless you want to preach solipsism but it is true that all nonsubjective knowledge requires that one make rational assumptions.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
Tamminen
Posts: 1347
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Tamminen »

Felix wrote: August 17th, 2018, 2:44 pm
To say that the world without subjects is possible requires a leap from an internal viewpoint to an external viewpoint, from immanence to transcendence. It is a religious leap, and it has no justification.
Well, you can't go that far unless you want to preach solipsism but it is true that all nonsubjective knowledge requires that one make rational assumptions.
I think the world is a community of subjects. I guess this is not solipsism.
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Felix wrote: August 17th, 2018, 2:44 pm
To say that the world without subjects is possible requires a leap from an internal viewpoint to an external viewpoint, from immanence to transcendence. It is a religious leap, and it has no justification.
Well, you can't go that far unless you want to preach solipsism but it is true that all nonsubjective knowledge requires that one make rational assumptions.
You mean like Bio-energy healing??
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Sy Borg »

Gertie wrote: August 16th, 2018, 8:20 am
Halc wrote: August 15th, 2018, 9:47 pm
We're well aware that you are saying this. But this is simply your premise, not a conclusion drawn from evidence or logic or anything.
My understanding of Tam's position is that it's a big picture whole cloth 'What if...' hypothesis.

It doesn't 'follow the evidence' and there's no logical formulation which gets him there.

So we're left with it 'feeling like it makes sense' because... without experiencing Subjects, there's no knowledge or meaning.


The ontological step from No Knowing, to Nothing Existing To Be Known, thereby becomes what he would call absurd.


This gives Subject Experiencing a much more significant role in the fundamental nature of reality, which isn't a neat fit with our traditional ways of viewing reality, which are more neatly packaged in evidence and logic.


The big fly in the ointment is the evidence that non-conscious stuff existed prior to Subjects who could experience it. In order to incorporate this evidence, which he accepts, there has to be some underlying Subject-Object Relationship which is more fundamental than the Time relationship between the two.


It's an interesting way to conceptualise the world, but it doesn't use our usual tools of evidence or logic, so persuading anyone else is really down to it 'feeling like it makes sense' to them too. It also puts it outside the usual testing grounds of evidence and logic, and makes debate frustrating. There's nothing to anchor it, no grounds to debate on, no way to test it. As an argument it stands or falls on whether it makes sense to you.
Thank you, Gertie, for so well articulating misgivings about the "subject first" view I'd groped for numerous times but could never find. This has bugged me for years! You have given me the relief one feels when a word is on the tip of your tongue but stays maddeningly out of range until someone finally someone says it :)

Yes, Tam's ideas seem to be drawing more on the mystical body of knowledge that has run parallel to scientific knowledge for centuries. To be fair, western science is still yet to work through many of the discoveries in subjectivity that were almost as rigorously experimented with in Buddhism as outer phenomena has been tested by western science.

Maybe neuroscience and even AI developments might act as a bridge between these studies of the "objective" and "subjective"? One would not hope for another endless impasse as has been the case between relativity and QM.

Or could this suggest that reality really is in some sense split down the middle? Or maybe it's our perceptions that are somehow split and imposed upon a seamless reality? Rhetorical questions. I wouldn't know.
BigBango
Posts: 343
Joined: March 15th, 2018, 6:15 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by BigBango »

Greta, you need to step back and realize how ingrained it is for us to believe that the "subject" evolved from inanimate matter. In my view the fundamental existent is the galaxy that always has both "subject" and inanimate matter as its members.

With that presumption, Tam's thesis fits nicely, It is very much consistent with Schopenhauer's " The World as Will and Representation", only it is "The World as Experienced and Representation".

What Tam needs to address is the solipsism of his thesis as mentioned by Felix.

Why did we have the Copernican revolution before "subjects saw the earth rotating around the sun?

Any "subjects" view of another subjects experiential states is an objective, external view. In Tam's terms that would constitute a religious view as would all of sciences established conclusions. Kant addresses this problem by saying that the "objective world" cooperates by being a world that we can understand and agree amongst ourselves. How does Tam overcome the solipsism of his thesis?
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Sy Borg »

BigBango wrote: August 18th, 2018, 12:24 amGreta, you need to step back and realize how ingrained it is for us to believe that the "subject" evolved from inanimate matter. In my view the fundamental existent is the galaxy that always has both "subject" and inanimate matter as its members.
I will consider what you say if you can explain where the subjects might be in the early universe of plasma and hot gas clouds?
BigBango wrote:What Tam needs to address is the solipsism of his thesis as mentioned by Felix.
Agreed.
BigBango wrote:In Tam's terms that would constitute a religious view as would all of sciences established conclusions.
I completely reject any claim that science is religious. It's as illogical as claiming that religion is scientific.

White is black too - if you turn the lights off.
BigBango wrote:Kant addresses this problem by saying that the "objective world" cooperates by being a world that we can understand and agree amongst ourselves. How does Tam overcome the solipsism of his thesis?
Kant was being poetic. Nature seems so terribly obliging to our endeavours, aside from the small fact that we spend our lives trying to prevent her from absorbing us back into herself - until we no longer can, of course.

The "objective" world consists of the patterns of nature discernible by technological hominids at this particular stage of their development. No doubt they miss plenty of patterns too. Further, the human capacity to see quasi patterns was made famous by iconic examples of pareidolia applied to Mars rover images. So we make errors of interpretation at times.
Tamminen
Posts: 1347
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Tamminen »

BigBango wrote: August 18th, 2018, 12:24 am Any "subjects" view of another subjects experiential states is an objective, external view. In Tam's terms that would constitute a religious view as would all of sciences established conclusions. Kant addresses this problem by saying that the "objective world" cooperates by being a world that we can understand and agree amongst ourselves. How does Tam overcome the solipsism of his thesis?
As I replied to Felix, there is no solipsim in this phase. That comes later in my metaphysical reasoning. There is an objective world that all of us share, and the others appear to us as subjects. Where is the solipsism? It is only that without subjects there is nothing. This should not be so difficult to understand. A simple reflective step proves this.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Sy Borg »

Tamminem, please indulge me and explain just one more time, as clearly as possible, how there could be subjects in the early universe of plasma and thick gas?
Tamminen
Posts: 1347
Joined: April 19th, 2016, 2:53 pm

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Tamminen »

Greta wrote: August 18th, 2018, 3:25 am Tamminem, please indulge me and explain just one more time, as clearly as possible, how there could be subjects in the early universe of plasma and thick gas?
We are the subjects. Here and now. Simple enough?
User avatar
Thinking critical
Posts: 1793
Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)

Re: Whatever Consciousness is, it's Not Physical (or reducible to physical).

Post by Thinking critical »

Tamminen wrote: August 17th, 2018, 10:51 am To say that the world without subjects is possible requires a leap from an internal viewpoint to an external viewpoint, from immanence to transcendence. It is a religious leap, and it has no justification.
Not so, it requires nothing more than logical deduction.
I can deduce that the world necessarily existed before my being came into existence because I was a born from another who required a world to exist in order for them to have me.
No faith required just a rational thinking and logic.
This cocky little cognitive contortionist will straighten you right out
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021