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
Wayne92587
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

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

Post by Wayne92587 »

@Consul
The identity theory of mind has issues. For instance, it claims that brains without a certain type of hardware can't experience consciousness.
Very True!
The Singularity of Man having the dual quality of Mind and Body must be One in order to be Conscious.

From Emerald Tablet;

Squaring the Circle
That which is below is as that which is above, and that which is above is as that which is below, to perform the miracles of the one thing,
Consciousness!

1
Wayne92587
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

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

Post by Wayne92587 »

The Flesh Body is the Temple of the Soul, Consciousness.
Wayne92587
Posts: 1780
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

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

Post by Wayne92587 »

The Flesh Body is the Temple of the Soul, Consciousness, is the hardware of Brain.

The duality of 0/1 two as One is greater than the sum total of the two as Individual Singularities of Zero-0.

Squaring the Circle-0/
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 »

Consciousness is not reducible to the physical, yet it is never apparent outside of physical manifestations. (Leibnitz)

The reality of experiential states is a fact that precedes any physical evolution of mental properties.

Tamminem has asserted this truth as an ontological extension of Descartes reasoning that " I think therefore I am" into its natural extension to "I think of me as an object therefore I am an object" and "objects" are something that are dependent on my awareness of them.

What this means is that reality has always been conditioned on our awareness of it, but our awareness never had to evolve from it.




.
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 »

Wayne92587 wrote: September 2nd, 2018, 8:49 am The Flesh Body is the Temple of the Soul, Consciousness, is the hardware of Brain.
I think you mean software.
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 »

BigBango wrote: September 19th, 2018, 1:28 am Consciousness is not reducible to the physical, yet it is never apparent outside of physical manifestations. (Leibnitz)
Where does he say this, and in what context?

The reality of experiential states is a fact that precedes any physical evolution of mental properties.
How can you have experience without mental properties?

Tamminem has asserted this truth as an ontological extension of Descartes reasoning that " I think therefore I am" into its natural extension to "I think of me as an object therefore I am an object" and "objects" are something that are dependent on my awareness of them.

What this means is that reality has always been conditioned on our awareness of it, but our awareness never had to evolve from it.
I do not think it means that at all. Most people take 'reality' as a thing we can only have partial perception of, and partial experience of. IT is not conditioned BY our perception, and human awareness had to evolve from it regardless of our personal solipsistic perceptions.
Since our birth did not allow the universe to come into being, reality provided for our very existence, and is the precursor of ALL experience definitively.
If Descartes observation is to be understood as positing ourselves as an Object, then that asserts also that reality is a thing into which an object is born.


.
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 »

If we think of the universe as a spatiotemporal totality, as I do, and as modern physics does, it is not difficult to think that the existence of the universe depends on the existence of subjects, so that the very being of the universe is based on the being of subjectivity. Time is only one dimension of this totality. The uninhabited past of the universe is in relation to the inhabited present, to us, whoever or whatever we happen to be. We do not know any other kind of being if we think of the universe as a whole, as a holistic structure. And there is no rational justification to extrapolate our thinking outside of this world of subjects. It would be an uninhabited alternate universe instead of this universe we live in, a universe without any subjective perspective, and to me that is an absurd thought, a thought that tries to eliminate itself out of being. So there is necessarily someone or something looking at the world if there is a world at all. This is the idea of the subject-world relationship being fundamental for all being, so that without it there can be nothing and everything that happens, happens within that relationship. This is why I have called it the Archimedean point of reality.
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 »

ThomasHobbes wrote: September 19th, 2018, 3:57 am
BigBango wrote: September 19th, 2018, 1:28 am Consciousness is not reducible to the physical, yet it is never apparent outside of physical manifestations. (Leibnitz)
Where does he say this, and in what context?
"Monadology and Other Philosophical Essays" pg 148 - 163

In these pages Leibniz explicates his analysis of the fundamental properties of nature with particular emphasis on the nature of "monads". It is quite startling how his analysis matches with Tamminen's description of the "subject". Leibnitz differentiates "composites" from "monads". Both these entities exist as components of "substance". Composites are infinitely divisible while monads are not.

While I admit Leibniz does not offer an argument as to whether or not the monads evolve from composites(matter) or composites are dependent on monads, he does make it clear that "substance" (matter) has both aspects. For that reason, we need to classify his theories as dual aspect theories of reality where both aspects are necessary yet not derivable one from the other.

While Tamminen elevates the "subject"/monad in importance Leibniz simply explains their role in what we call nature under God. Yet he makes it clear that monads are individually different and their nature depends on how they each perceive reality!

[quote=BigBango post_id=319927 time=1537334924 user_id=48146
The reality of experiential states is a fact that precedes any physical evolution of mental properties.[/quote]
ThomasHobbes wrote: September 19th, 2018, 3:57 am
How can you have experience without mental properties?
Content evolves within the "subject" but the fundamental nature of the subject does not change.

Tamminem has asserted this truth as an ontological extension of Descartes reasoning that " I think therefore I am" into its natural extension to "I think of me as an object therefore I am an object" and "objects" are something that are dependent on my awareness of them.

What this means is that reality has always been conditioned on our awareness of it, but our awareness never had to evolve from it.
ThomasHobbes wrote: September 19th, 2018, 3:57 am
I do not think it means that at all. Most people take 'reality' as a thing we can only have partial perception of, and partial experience of. IT is not conditioned BY our perception, and human awareness had to evolve from it regardless of our personal solipsistic perceptions.
Since our birth did not allow the universe to come into being, reality provided for our very existence, and is the precursor of ALL experience definitively.
If Descartes observation is to be understood as positing ourselves as an Object, then that asserts also that reality is a thing into which an object is born.
The precursor of all experience is dependent on the existence of the "experiencer".

.
[/quote]
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 »

BigBango wrote: September 21st, 2018, 1:33 am
ThomasHobbes wrote: September 19th, 2018, 3:57 am
Where does he say this, and in what context?
"Monadology and Other Philosophical Essays" pg 148 - 163

In these pages Leibniz explicates his analysis of the fundamental properties of nature with particular emphasis on the nature of "monads". It is quite startling how his analysis matches with Tamminen's description of the "subject". Leibnitz differentiates "composites" from "monads". Both these entities exist as components of "substance". Composites are infinitely divisible while monads are not.

While I admit Leibniz does not offer an argument as to whether or not the monads evolve from composites(matter) or composites are dependent on monads, he does make it clear that "substance" (matter) has both aspects. For that reason, we need to classify his theories as dual aspect theories of reality where both aspects are necessary yet not derivable one from the other.

While Tamminen elevates the "subject"/monad in importance Leibniz simply explains their role in what we call nature under God. Yet he makes it clear that monads are individually different and their nature depends on how they each perceive reality!

[quote=BigBango post_id=319927 time=1537334924 user_id=48146
The reality of experiential states is a fact that precedes any physical evolution of mental properties.
ThomasHobbes wrote: September 19th, 2018, 3:57 am
How can you have experience without mental properties?
Content evolves within the "subject" but the fundamental nature of the subject does not change.

Tamminem has asserted this truth as an ontological extension of Descartes reasoning that " I think therefore I am" into its natural extension to "I think of me as an object therefore I am an object" and "objects" are something that are dependent on my awareness of them.

What this means is that reality has always been conditioned on our awareness of it, but our awareness never had to evolve from it.
ThomasHobbes wrote: September 19th, 2018, 3:57 am
I do not think it means that at all. Most people take 'reality' as a thing we can only have partial perception of, and partial experience of. IT is not conditioned BY our perception, and human awareness had to evolve from it regardless of our personal solipsistic perceptions.
Since our birth did not allow the universe to come into being, reality provided for our very existence, and is the precursor of ALL experience definitively.
If Descartes observation is to be understood as positing ourselves as an Object, then that asserts also that reality is a thing into which an object is born.
The precursor of all experience is dependent on the existence of the "experiencer".

.
[/quote]
[/quote]


You have answered ZERO of my points. Instead you have tried to divert and fudge your answer.
Where EXACTLY does Leibnitz say what you claim he said?
You notion of a monad is bizarrely dualistic; you must be joking!! The clues is in the word MONad implying ONE, not two.

You have not begun to address the false claim you made before.

I'll ask again. "How can you have experience without mental properties?"
Saying experience depends on an experiencer is not an answer since it does not address this problem in any sense, as an experiencer also requires mental properties so that they can experience.

I assume you are simply trying to wriggle out of your previous unconsidered comments.
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 »

Tamminen wrote: September 19th, 2018, 4:45 pm If we think of the universe as a spatiotemporal totality, as I do, and as modern physics does, it is not difficult to think that the existence of the universe depends on the existence of subjects, so that the very being of the universe is based on the being of subjectivity.
But you know intuitively that this is not so. The universe does not depend on the subject. It is only the perception of the universe that depends on the subject.
The universe did not spring into existence when you were born neither shall it be destroyed when you die.
If we all died the universe would abide and endure.
It is perfectly reasonable to take an idealist and/or subjectivist stance without the banal and solipsistic conclusion that everything depends on you experiencing it.
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 »

ThomasHobbes wrote: September 21st, 2018, 5:30 am
Tamminen wrote: September 19th, 2018, 4:45 pm If we think of the universe as a spatiotemporal totality, as I do, and as modern physics does, it is not difficult to think that the existence of the universe depends on the existence of subjects, so that the very being of the universe is based on the being of subjectivity.
But you know intuitively that this is not so. The universe does not depend on the subject. It is only the perception of the universe that depends on the subject.
The universe did not spring into existence when you were born neither shall it be destroyed when you die.
If we all died the universe would abide and endure.
It is perfectly reasonable to take an idealist and/or subjectivist stance without the banal and solipsistic conclusion that everything depends on you experiencing it.
I have discussed this with others many times, and I only repeat: my view is that the being of the world without the being of some subjective perspective is impossible. And I know intuitively that it must be so. But I think this discussion cannot lead to agreement any more than it has led so far with anyone else.

We must separate how the world appears to the subject and that there is a world at all, and also the latter depends on the being of subjectivity. For me this is obvious, but not for all, of which I am surprised.

And of course this has nothing to do with solipsism. The world is a community of subjects, and my personal nonexistence does not end the world. Only if there is no one, has never been anyone and will never be anyone, only in that case, which is in itself impossible, there would be absolutely nothing. And that nothingness, if it were possible, would have nothing to do with anything that physically happens to the physical world. This is a paradox, and it is solved by concluding that there must necessarily be a subjective perspective to the world for there being a world.

My view is a combination of epistemological realism and ontological idealism or subjectivism. The question of solipsism is interesting, but it has nothing to do with these considerations except for the metaphysical consequences of them, of which I have written elsewhere.
User avatar
Present awareness
Posts: 1389
Joined: February 3rd, 2014, 7:02 pm

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

Post by Present awareness »

The idea that we are somehow seperate from the universe, is where the problem arises. We ARE the universe! All of our perceptions take place beneath our skin. Although we may consider that everything beyond our skin is the universe, and we are somehow a seperate entity, it is merely a projection of abstract thinking, which creates a separation where no separation exists.

We have always existed and it matters not whether we prefer our present form of existence or not, for nothing is permanent and will change continuously. We may not remember life as a sperm cell or egg, but we have all been there.
Even though you can see me, I might not be here.
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 »

Tamminen wrote: September 21st, 2018, 9:50 am
ThomasHobbes wrote: September 21st, 2018, 5:30 am

But you know intuitively that this is not so. The universe does not depend on the subject. It is only the perception of the universe that depends on the subject.
The universe did not spring into existence when you were born neither shall it be destroyed when you die.
If we all died the universe would abide and endure.
It is perfectly reasonable to take an idealist and/or subjectivist stance without the banal and solipsistic conclusion that everything depends on you experiencing it.
I have discussed this with others many times, and I only repeat: my view is that the being of the world without the being of some subjective perspective is impossible. And I know intuitively that it must be so. But I think this discussion cannot lead to agreement any more than it has led so far with anyone else.
I don't really care what you believe.
We all know that the universe did not come into being the day YOU were born.
In the face of such evidence your belief is not worth more than a damp sticky tissue in a teenagers bed.
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 »

Present awareness wrote: September 21st, 2018, 10:27 am The idea that we are somehow seperate from the universe, is where the problem arises. We ARE the universe! All of our perceptions take place beneath our skin. Although we may consider that everything beyond our skin is the universe, and we are somehow a seperate entity, it is merely a projection of abstract thinking, which creates a separation where no separation exists.

We have always existed and it matters not whether we prefer our present form of existence or not, for nothing is permanent and will change continuously. We may not remember life as a sperm cell or egg, but we have all been there.
Yeah man, like we are all the Universe!!

Listen: I am not the same as you. Whilst that very useful distinction exists I'll prefer to use common sense and reason, and avoid the new-age platitudes and muesli-trousers wearing pseudo-philosophy. LOL
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 »

ThomasHobbes wrote: September 21st, 2018, 11:19 am We all know that the universe did not come into being the day YOU were born.
Agreed. Did I say something like that? Idealism is something much more profound, and should be discussed on the level it has been discussed through the history of philosophy. But I think this is not the place where we can mount on that level.
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