The March Philosophy Book of the Month is Final Notice by Van Fleisher. Discuss Final Notice now.

The April Philosophy Book of the Month is The Unbound Soul by Richard L. Haight

Conciousness of Living Things

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
User avatar
kk23wong
Posts: 119
Joined: June 28th, 2009, 4:23 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Conciousness of Living Things

Post by kk23wong » September 6th, 2009, 4:56 am

Conciousness of Living Things
The definitions of the living things are mistakes from the past.
Living things MUST BE concious.
Please take a look on my analyses below.

Applying Biological Concepts into Planets
Evaluations on the Concepts and Theories of Evolution

There are common characteristics among living things. By comparing them with the Earth, we will have a more concrete idea on how the eco-system (the life-cycles inside the planet) works. Thus, we can use the biological concepts (which can be applied on the Earth) as a solid ground to find out the validity of my hypothesis, ‘Planets are living things”. The similarities among living things are the clues to the live symptoms of the planets themselves. I have mentioned before that the planets themselves are alive, although their forms of existences and life expectancies are different from the living organisms inside. In fact, the forms of existences vary among living things.

Other planets in the solar system (in which, they can be reached and observed) are being adopted as the “control experiments” of the Earth. The cross-references in-between the Earth and other planet (i.e. the Mars) will definitely contribute to breakthroughs in our cosmology. This research will help us to find out the guiding principles of the mechanism in our universe. The ages of the planets are obstacles in the comparisons. The process of aging is an inevitable result of every planet. The key elements are the ages of these planets. The end of the “life-cycles” of the planets resulted in the extinctions of the planet without any live symptom. The inter-exchanges of the chemical particles inside a planet are almost invisible in these planets (in which, their life-cycles have come to an end) because of their “ages”. Thus, the symptoms of lives and evidences of civilizations have been demolished by unknown causes before or after their life-cycles have come to an end. The ages of the planets are speculations only.

To begin with, I am going to put the focus on evaluating the Earth with biological theories first in order to find out the similarities in-between the Earth and other living things. The applications of the biological theories on the Earth (e.g. reproduction, “life cycles” – growth and aging) are essential. Reviews on other scientific researches (including those under-developing theories) are necessary and essential. My hypothesis comes across various scientific subjects. Due to my limitations in the professionals for all of them, reviews on existing scientific theories are essential. I am taking up this research as a lifetime project because it is worthy. The “Definitions of Living Things” as I mentioned in my previous article are diversified in sciences and the proofs of my hypothesis are closely associated with them. The hypothesis “Lives at different levels” is different from the “evolution of species”. The planets are conscious objects. In which, she (the “God”) is thinking in a unity. The forms of presences take the lead in my hypothesis.

First, the “reconstruction” of the definitions of living things is my first approach. Plants (natural vegetations) acts like the organs inside the our bodies. Definitions of living things have to be modified. Two branches come in the first place during the classification of species: (1) Animals and Insects; (2) Plants. Under my hypothesis, the Earth is a living object. Plants are responsible for the interchanges of chemicals inside her body. They carried out the processes of “photosynthesis” which are necessary for her “life-cycles”. In which, their functions are necessary for maintaining the “life-cycles” of the Earth. They are not conscious. However, “animals and insects” are her offspring. They are conscious. Therefore, only “animals and insects” can be classified as ‘living things”. Hence, the definitions of the living things have been changed. Plants are not conscious and cannot be defined as “living things”. They are only organs inside a planet, but the planet itself is CONCIOUS. The questions of consciousness have to be the first criteria for the definitions of living things. “Animals and insects” are the offspring of the planet. All of them are conscious. Plants are not conscious because they are only the organs of the Earth. If the Earth is conscious, consciousness will become the ONLY definition of living things.

Second, the application of the “evolution” is another approach. The combination of the theories of “evolution” will definitely help to explain the diversification of the offspring of the planet. The Earth is the candle as well as the origin of lives. The planets themselves have “life-cycles” which may be accompanied with the evolutions of their offspring. It is the first attempt to illustrate my hypothesis. The complexity of lives may have cohesions and even in the same progress of the “life-cycles” of our Earth. The simplicity of lives from the beginning and gradually turned out to become more complex forms of lives throughout the time. The extinctions of all species are the end of the “life-cycles” of the planets. The diversification of species in the beginning and it gradually turned into extinctions of all species. Our civilizations are the major triggers for the acceleration of the process of extinctions of species. Thus, it has resulted in the chain effects of extinctions of species and destroyed the “life-cycles” inside the planet. The cohesiveness in-between the “evolutions and extinctions of species” and the “live-cycles” of the planet need further researches. Under my hypothesis, planets carry out reproductions inside their bodies. To be more specific, the “evolution and extinction of species” may act as both the “life-cycles” and “reproductions” of the Earth. In the meantime, it proves the Earth has undergone a process of growth. She “grows” from simplicity into complex forms of lives. This approach aims at improving my hypothesis. Evolution is a process of “growth” of the Earth. It is a continuous process in her “life-cycles”.

I am going to develop my hypothesis in the directions above.

Teru Wong
Last edited by kk23wong on September 7th, 2009, 2:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
wanabe
Posts: 3388
Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
Location: UBIQUITY
Contact:

Post by wanabe » September 6th, 2009, 1:03 pm

You need to define conscious in your own terms then.

Plants are quite conscious of their surroundings, just not the way other life is. Ex: when a plant (in a lab or nature) is burned other plants around it react by making certain chemicals to let the other plants prepare for fire damage. More over they follow the light. Plants do communicate with each-other through a variety of ways. The only way that can be scientifically proven is through chemicals, however they do also communicate through electro-magnetic fields.

As per my knowledge of definitions of life: there has never been an excepted one...i have created one: creates similar forms or copies of it self under its own "independent" power.

I do agree with your analogy of planets being alive. But you, in my opinion, are oversimplifying it for you own sake of communication and understanding, so much so that it is inaccurate.

To say that plants are only organs and are not alive, is to ignore the role that animals play in exhaling carbon dioxide.

Your lungs need you to live, and you need them to live you are made up of a conglomerate of living things codependent on each other. Each organ makes copies of it self; every cell in your body is replaced in approximately 7 year cycles. Together your organs work as team to be a cooperating living form, contained in a single body.

Some more food for thought, the heart like the brain has neural cells. If those cells are what foster conscious in the brain, then the heart is also conscious because it has those same cells. As do the lungs, and other organs. It is necessary that all organs be conscious. If it were not the case then people who are brain dead, would be, just dead. Because the organs wouldn't have enough guidance from the brain to keep the whole body alive.

I strongly urge you to rethink your hypothesis, completely. You said you knew little, now you may know more, please reconsider.
Last edited by wanabe on September 6th, 2009, 1:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, Help All Others To Do So.Meaning of Life Is Choice. Increase choice through direct perception. Golden rule+universality principal+Promote benefits-harm+logical consistency=morality.BeTheChange.

Nick_A
Posts: 2391
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Conciousness of Living Things

Post by Nick_A » September 6th, 2009, 1:10 pm

kk23wong wrote:Conciousness of Living Things
The definitions of the living things are mistakes from the past.
Living things MUST BE concious.
Please take a look on my analyses below.

Applying Biological Concepts into Planets
Evaluations on the Concepts and Theories of Evolution

There are common characteristics among living things. By comparing them with the Earth, we will have a more concrete idea on how the eco-system (the life-cycles inside the planet) works. Thus, we can use the biological concepts (which can be applied on the Earth) as a solid ground to find out the validity of my hypothesis, ‘Planets are living things”. The similarities among living things are the clues to the live symptoms of the planets themselves. I have mentioned before that the planets themselves are alive, although their forms of existences and life expectancies are different from the living organisms inside. In fact, the forms of existences vary among living things.

Other planets in the solar system (in which, they can be reached and observed) are being adopted as the “control experiments” of the Earth. The cross-references in-between the Earth and other planet (i.e. the Mars) will definitely contribute to breakthroughs in our cosmology. This research will help us to find out the guiding principles of the mechanism in our universe. The ages of the planets are obstacles in the comparisons. The process of aging is an inevitable result of every planet. The key elements are the ages of these planets. The end of the “life-cycles” of the planets resulted in the extinctions of the planet without any live symptom. The inter-exchanges of the chemical particles inside a planet are almost invisible in these planets (in which, their life-cycles have come to an end) because of their “ages”. Thus, the symptoms of lives and evidences of civilizations have been demolished by unknown causes before or after their life-cycles have come to an end. The ages of the planets are speculations only.

To begin with, I am going to put the focus on evaluating the Earth with biological theories first in order to find out the similarities in-between the Earth and other living things. The applications of the biological theories on the Earth (e.g. reproduction, “life cycles” – growth and aging) are essential. Reviews on other scientific researches (including those under-developing theories) are necessary and essential. My hypothesis comes across various scientific subjects. Due to my limitations in the professionals for all of them, reviews on existing scientific theories are essential. I am taking up this research as a lifetime project because it is worthy. The “Definitions of Living Things” as I mentioned in my previous article are diversified in sciences and the proofs of my hypothesis are closely associated with them. The hypothesis “Lives at different levels” is different from the “evolution of species”. The planets are conscious objects. In which, she (the “God”) is thinking in a unity. The forms of presences take the lead in my hypothesis.

First, the “reconstruction” of the definitions of living things is my first approach. Plants (natural vegetations) acts like the organs inside the our bodies. Definitions of living things have to be modified. Two branches come in the first place during the classification of species: (1) Animals and Insects; (2) Plants. Under my hypothesis, the Earth is a living object. Plants are responsible for the interchanges of chemicals inside her body. They carried out the processes of “photosynthesis” which are necessary for her “life-cycles”. In which, their functions are necessary for maintaining the “life-cycles” of the Earth. They are not conscious. However, “animals and insects” are her offspring. They are conscious. Therefore, only “animals and plants” can be classified as ‘living things”. Hence, the definitions of the living things have been changed. Plants are not conscious and cannot be defined as “living things”. They are only organs inside a planet, but the planet itself is CONCIOUS. The questions of consciousness have to be the first criteria for the definitions of living things. “Animals and insects” are the offspring of the planet. All of them are conscious. Plants are not conscious because they are only the organs of the Earth. If the Earth is conscious, consciousness will become the ONLY definition of living things.

Second, the application of the “evolution” is another approach. The combination of the theories of “evolution” will definitely help to explain the diversification of the offspring of the planet. The Earth is the candle as well as the origin of lives. The planets themselves have “life-cycles” which may be accompanied with the evolutions of their offspring. It is the first attempt to illustrate my hypothesis. The complexity of lives may have cohesions and even in the same progress of the “life-cycles” of our Earth. The simplicity of lives from the beginning and gradually turned out to become more complex forms of lives throughout the time. The extinctions of all species are the end of the “life-cycles” of the planets. The diversification of species in the beginning and it gradually turned into extinctions of all species. Our civilizations are the major triggers for the acceleration of the process of extinctions of species. Thus, it has resulted in the chain effects of extinctions of species and destroyed the “life-cycles” inside the planet. The cohesiveness in-between the “evolutions and extinctions of species” and the “live-cycles” of the planet need further researches. Under my hypothesis, planets carry out reproductions inside their bodies. To be more specific, the “evolution and extinction of species” may act as both the “life-cycles” and “reproductions” of the Earth. In the meantime, it proves the Earth has undergone a process of growth. She “grows” from simplicity into complex forms of lives. This approach aims at improving my hypothesis. Evolution is a process of “growth” of the Earth. It is a continuous process in her “life-cycles”.

I am going to develop my hypothesis in the directions above.

Teru Wong
I'm not being critical here but if the earth is conscious, what is it conscious of? Before asserting the earth is conscious, wouldn't it be better to define consciousness?
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace

User avatar
kk23wong
Posts: 119
Joined: June 28th, 2009, 4:23 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Post by kk23wong » September 8th, 2009, 2:24 am

“Consciousness is the ability to think.”

A single line above can define the term “consciousness”.

Birth is the start. Death is the end.

As I used to say, “Live and Death, so simple. People imagine because of fears.”
Existentialism rules.

The God is physically exist.
The planet is conscious.

Plants are non-living things because they are not conscious.
Plants can grow and diversified into species because they are the organic living tissue of the Earth.

The God is physically exist.

“I think, therefore, I am.”
The one who speaks died, he is not anymore.

Philosophy must not be high sounding nothing.
A line can do.

Challenge me if you want to be in history.

Teru Wong

nameless
Posts: 1234
Joined: May 13th, 2008, 9:06 pm
Location: Here/Now

Post by nameless » September 8th, 2009, 3:07 am

^^^ Gee, the start of a new religion! All these 'beliefs' disguised as Universal facts!
Good start!

Nick_A
Posts: 2391
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Post by Nick_A » September 8th, 2009, 11:37 am

KK
“Consciousness is the ability to think.”


A computer has the ability to think. That is its purpose. Does that mean a computer is conscious?
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace

User avatar
kk23wong
Posts: 119
Joined: June 28th, 2009, 4:23 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Post by kk23wong » September 8th, 2009, 11:54 am

Nick_A wrote:KK
“Consciousness is the ability to think.”


A computer has the ability to think. That is its purpose. Does that mean a computer is conscious?
Computer is a programmed machine to calculate.
The new definitions of living things will have great impacts on philosophy.

The question does not lie on the definitions of “consciousness”, but it is the question of the living objects.

Teru Wong

User avatar
wanabe
Posts: 3388
Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
Location: UBIQUITY
Contact:

Post by wanabe » September 8th, 2009, 12:30 pm

If your not even going to consider the idea of plants being alive; then there is little point for us to do anything but: oh my god, your right! How could we have ever been so foolish?
Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, Help All Others To Do So.Meaning of Life Is Choice. Increase choice through direct perception. Golden rule+universality principal+Promote benefits-harm+logical consistency=morality.BeTheChange.

User avatar
Brilliand
Posts: 52
Joined: September 8th, 2009, 6:36 pm
Location: (0,0,0) relative to my own position
Contact:

Post by Brilliand » September 9th, 2009, 2:45 am

Here is what I would call consciousness: regardless of what my brain is capable of, I see things from its perspective - I am an observer with a viewpoint of my own, not just a machine that takes input and produces output. Unfortunately, there is no way for me to identify for certain whether anything outside of myself has this experience - I can only guess that everything does, due to having no decent place to draw the line.

This contradicts the claim in the OP: if even stones have a trivial sort of consciousness, then it's pointless to define "life" according to consciousness.

User avatar
kk23wong
Posts: 119
Joined: June 28th, 2009, 4:23 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Post by kk23wong » September 10th, 2009, 11:23 pm

Brilliand wrote:Here is what I would call consciousness: regardless of what my brain is capable of, I see things from its perspective - I am an observer with a viewpoint of my own, not just a machine that takes input and produces output. Unfortunately, there is no way for me to identify for certain whether anything outside of myself has this experience - I can only guess that everything does, due to having no decent place to draw the line.

This contradicts the claim in the OP: if even stones have a trivial sort of consciousness, then it's pointless to define "life" according to consciousness.
Consciousness is the ability for living objects to response to outside world until death. It comes from birth.

The attachement below is my philosophical views.
http://teru-wong.yolasite.com/resources ... osophy.pdf

Teru Wong

Nothingman
Posts: 106
Joined: September 3rd, 2009, 3:35 pm

Post by Nothingman » September 11th, 2009, 8:29 am

Like Wannabe wrote before:Plants bend to the light.
That is reacting to the outside world right?
So by your own definition above, shouldn't you believe that plants are conscious?

User avatar
kk23wong
Posts: 119
Joined: June 28th, 2009, 4:23 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Post by kk23wong » September 12th, 2009, 8:02 am

Nothingman wrote:Like Wannabe wrote before:Plants bend to the light.
That is reacting to the outside world right?
So by your own definition above, shouldn't you believe that plants are conscious?
Plants are organic living tissues which cannot violate the natural rule -- Sunlight is the origin of the power of the God (in my philosophical views). However, it is also a necesscity for plants (and animals). You see the wind pass by, the tree bend.

It is a scientific defintion. Microorganisms (including bacteria) absent in the space because they are actually organic living tissues of the Earth. The biological structure of the "brains" is the only possible way to define living thing.

Everyone has an answer before your death.

Teru Wong
Last edited by kk23wong on September 13th, 2009, 4:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
wanabe
Posts: 3388
Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
Location: UBIQUITY
Contact:

Post by wanabe » September 12th, 2009, 1:39 pm

How about a citation of that "scientific definition", sorry your cute little .pdf files don't count, nor does your home made website... Ok, so now that you defined consciousness, define think now, in your terms.
Secret To Eternal Life: Live Life To The Fullest, Help All Others To Do So.Meaning of Life Is Choice. Increase choice through direct perception. Golden rule+universality principal+Promote benefits-harm+logical consistency=morality.BeTheChange.

User avatar
kk23wong
Posts: 119
Joined: June 28th, 2009, 4:23 am
Location: Hong Kong
Contact:

Post by kk23wong » September 13th, 2009, 4:26 am

wanabe wrote:How about a citation of that "scientific definition", sorry your cute little .pdf files don't count, nor does your home made website... Ok, so now that you defined consciousness, define think now, in your terms.
“Consciousness” is the ability to react from the date we born. It ends with the day of our death. (Normally, it lasts for one day or more after doctors certified your death. Donations of organs are not recommended by the Church because the God knows it.)

Teru Wong

Nothingman
Posts: 106
Joined: September 3rd, 2009, 3:35 pm

Post by Nothingman » September 14th, 2009, 3:45 pm

kk23wong wrote:
wanabe wrote:How about a citation of that "scientific definition", sorry your cute little .pdf files don't count, nor does your home made website... Ok, so now that you defined consciousness, define think now, in your terms.
“Consciousness” is the ability to react from the date we born. It ends with the day of our death. (Normally, it lasts for one day or more after doctors certified your death. Donations of organs are not recommended by the Church because the God knows it.)

Teru Wong
I don't understand how you can state "Normally, it lasts for one day or more after doctors certified your death". Do you have any evidence or logical reason for this belief? Please explain.
Thanks.
The only thing I know is that I know one thing which is that.

Post Reply