• Blog

  • The Multiverse and Existential Scale | Robert Lawrence Kuhn

More philosophers and other people are now seeming to consider that low-level consciousness (possessed by particles, atoms and molecules) is an idea that makes sense. The only question is: what are particles, atoms and molecules conscious of? And clearly, they can only be conscious of themselves and their surroundings, in terms of low-level category and number information. In fact, this is similar to what occurs with living things, where low-level category and number information arrives via interactions in the senses. But with living things, this low-level information has to be collated and analysed in order to acquire high-level conscious information about potentially harmful-to-them objects in their surroundings.

ALL higher-level conscious information possessed by living things can be traced right back to low-level consciousness BY the senses of whatever low-level, physics-level information arrives via interactions in the senses. Consciousness of written and spoken words, and consciousness of objects in the environment, can only occur after the organism has analysed and collated the low-level, physics-level information continually arriving via the senses. There is no break in the chain of consciousness. There is no miracle ex-nihilo emergence of higher-level consciousness.

So, higher-level consciousness can be explained in terms of lower-level consciousness. And lower-level consciousness can be seen as the necessary “knowledge” component of a mathematical system, so that consciousness is a necessary prerequisite if you want to build a mathematical world.

Consciousness and creativity are necessary prerequisites if you want to build a mathematical world. However, when it comes to the question of why there is something rather than nothing, consciousness and creativity are the somethings that can’t be explained.

    Lorraine Ford
    Whether the concept of low level concsciousness applies, depends on how exactly you define it.
    If consciousness is the thought or awareness of feeling resuting from exterernal and from internal sensory stimulation -many material systems lack the complexity to be conscious. They can however be sub conscious. Responding automatically to inputs, so they have an effect upon what is acted upon and probably the actor.That is to say things can happen without a necessity of awareness.
    Although we might think of our brain as being conscious a lot of its functioin is sub conscious. The life support function of the brain stem are mostly subconsciours, As is the co ordination of momements carried out effortlessly by the cerebellum, not needing indstruction from the pre-frontal cortex, when all is working well. The pre-frontal cortex behind the forehead is the conscious thinking part of the brain we may associate with ourself. Many learned reflex actions are sub consciously controlled. We can even ride a bicycle or drive a car while daydreaming or pereoccupied on 'autopilot'.

        Georgina Woodward
        So Georgina, define consciousness. I have given my CONCISE definition of consciousness MANY, MANY times on this website, but NO ONE else seems willing to risk giving a definition. E.g. a definition of consciousness seemed to stump Steve and Ulla! Also, no one wants to read tiresome, long-winded, meandering definitions: give us a CONCISE definition of consciousness, as you see it.

            I am not Steve or Ulla ,so your reply wasn't very helpful to me.I found thisote though. LORRAINE FORD quote" Consciousness a nd matter are different aspects of the world, requiring different methods of symbolic representation (symbols like AND, OR and IS TRUE are required to represent consciousness), but they always exist together. There is no free-floating consciousness.
            Low-level consciousness has a function; it is the necessary knowledge aspect of the world, whereby the world can know itself, i.e. know its own law-of-nature equations, categories (like mass and position), and numbers that apply to the categories.
            Consciousness is a basic aspect of the world like particles, atoms and molecules are basic, and like laws-of-nature, categories and numbers are basic. So, being a basic aspect of the world, the question of how consciousness feels, or doesn’t feel, is actually irrelevant.'
            YOUR DEFINITION SEEMS TO BE CONSISTENT/COMPATIBLE WITH YOUR MODEL, BUT THAT DOES NOT GUARANTEE THE CORRECTNESS OF EITHER OR THAT IT WORKS WITH OTHER'S DEFINITIONJS AND MODEL'S OF REALITY.

              Georgina Woodward
              I THINK "consciousness is anattribute of complex systems, organic and potentially inorganic that process sensory input, whether or external or internal origin into feelings ,sensations output products of the senses or sensors, overseeing function of the system within set boundaries of function, associated with non-automatic homeostasis,, self talk and identity."

                  Lorraine Ford Like I explained, we have deep unknows still in maths, physics, philosophy, we must accept these limitations with humility. We evolve yes and actually yes we evolve quickly in the researchs but we have these deep unknowns and limitations. We try to reach, explain, define, prove these unknowns like this quantum gravitaion, the dark energy, the dark matter, the consciousness,.....we have not actually success at this quantum scale to explain them wih concrete maths, models, fields, particles......so this consciousness is nott explained , your ideas are interesting about categories, numbers.....but is not proved philosophically and physically speaking. This consciousness has a specific mechanism yes but not still found, we could have even a kind of mechanism where the panpsychism, the materialism, the pantheism are in a spefic mehanism where these unknowns that I cited are even in this mechanism added to this actual QFT, QM, SM. The dimensions maybe are a key with the geometrical algebras but not easy due to these limitaions in maths, physics,cosmology and philosophy. We could even have a 0D of consciousnes in a kind of pantheistic reasoning with this materialistic and panpsychic mechanism of this QM, QFT and its realistic dimensions. In fact nobody acttually has found the real mechanism , so we cannot affirm, regards

                    Georgina Woodward
                    Georgina,

                    Are those your own words enclosed in quotes, or someone else's words? There is no attribution. In any case, I’m sorry, but that quote is pretty much a meaningless jumble of big words.

                    You do realise, I hope, that to represent complex systems requires the use of logical connective symbols, as well as the usual equations (representing relationships, e.g. law of nature relationships) and numbers. What aspect of the real-world system do you think these necessary logical connective symbols are supposed to represent? What do you think is the significance of the logical connective symbols that are necessary to represent complex systems?

                    People once mistakenly thought that complex systems could model the idea that consciousness emerged from the world-system. But I think that it was soon realised that the things that seem to “emerge”, e.g. in cellular automata, are a completely superficial and non-functional aspect of the system. In fact, nothing actually emerges, except from the point of view of someone outside the system, looking down on the superficial appearance of the system.

                      @Lorraine Ford"#p168752
                      I THINK, MEANS THESE ARE MY THOUGHTS NOT WORDS SHARED AS YET "consciousness is an attribute of complex systems, organic and potentially inorganic, that process sensory input, whether or external or internal origin into feelings ,sensations output products of the senses or sensors, overseeing function of the system within set boundaries of function, associated with non-automatic homeostasis,, self talk and identity." Georgina Woodward.
                      I have been thinking it may be better to replace the terms organic and inorganic with living and non living, to better communicate the intended meaning.

                        Georgina Woodward So you consider that this consiousness is a basic foundamental of the universe and that all is conscious organic and non organic , could you tell us more please about the philosophy correlated with this reasoning it seems interesting , is it a kind of pantheistic reasoning like if this consciousness were a reality for all particles of this universe and after the complexity imply the categories and expressions of this consciousness. Me Personally I consider an infinite eternal consiousness creating this universe and so I consider that all is conscious at its level of complexity but of course we cannot affirm, Regards

                            Georgina Woodward it may be better to replace the terms organic and inorganic with living and non living, to better communicate the intended meaning.

                            What is life? It shares the same atoms like non-living matter, so how can it start to live, do choices? Somehow this feel arbitrary. The main difference between living and non-living is not in the atoms, but in the time, so we must construct some time organization, and we see this dicotomy fades away? The only difference is in time and in amount of choices. We can put all functions on a line if we start from this?

                                Georgina Woodward
                                RE. "meaningless jumble of big words" lorraine Ford
                                Homeostasis-maintenance of internal conditions to preserve and maintain life functions, or maintain normal nonlife function, if non living.
                                Google search, AI top result "Homeostasis is the process by which living organisms maintain a stable internal environment to survive and function properly:
                                Eg. I am here (position in space).I am in a stable stance, I feel I am off balance, I am too hot, I am cold, I am hungry, I have eaten enough, I am thirsty, I am well hydrated, I am tired, I am alert and wide awake, I am fatiged, I am rested, I am in pain , I am injured, I am unwell, All is well.

                                  Steve Dufourny
                                  Steve,
                                  I don't think that consciousness and pan psychism are in any way related according to my definition of consciousness. I do however not discount the possibility that non life of sufficient complexity such as a general artificial inteligence could posess comparable consciousnss. If for example it is attached to sensors giving it some sence of it's environment and internal sensors giving awareness and control of proper functioning of the host machine, so that fuction is maintained.
                                  The machine and the human body are different and therefore we should not expect machines to have feelings like our own, generated by endocrine system functioning and sensations exacltly as generated by our brains from in put to our human sense organs. Perhaps in recognition of the differences it should be called machine consciousness. In the way we talk of machine intelligence to aknowlege machines work very differetly to human bodies .

                                    There seems to be an assumption that learned experts, of one sort or another, are required to explain to conscious people what it is like to be conscious.

                                    The conscious people themselves don’t feel confident to say what it is like to be conscious, and they look to experts, and the experts’ books and videos, to define consciousness for them.

                                    In particular, the conscious people don’t feel confident to say that their consciousness has a useful function.

                                    Are there any conscious people out there willing to risk saying that their consciousness is necessary and useful, i.e. that consciousness just might have a very necessary and very useful function in the world?

                                    No one is willing to risk it. No one is willing to risk saying that consciousness is necessary and useful.

                                      Ulla Mattfolk
                                      Ulla,
                                      life is not just structures of matter, it is energy taking part in many chemical reactions that work together to enable the organism to carry out the activities of living necessary for it'survival and that of it's kind. It is a happening rather than just existence..
                                      many of the activities of living are to do with getting energy and raw materials from food and oxygen . Getting oxygen, getting food, processing it to rovide raw materials for growth and repair and energy supply.Thereby resisting the second law of thermodynamics.


                                          Lorraine Ford
                                          Maintenance of homeostasis is vital for survival. Continual monotoring of the internal environment is used for this and adjustment by behavour ,as well as the automatic adjustments that occur is enabled.
                                          Gaining knowledge about the external environment through the senses is of vital importance ; for self and ones kind. PREDATORS, RESOURCES, MATES, SHELTER. can all be located using the products of the senses.

                                            Georgina Woodward
                                            SPELLING CORRECTION
                                            I don't really understand what you are saying about time Both animate and inanimate matter exist together. The living thing can prolong it's existence,

                                              There seems to be an assumption that learned experts, of one sort or another, are required to explain to conscious people what it is like to be conscious.

                                              The conscious people themselves don’t feel confident to say what it is like to be conscious, and they look to experts, and the experts’ books and videos, to define consciousness for them.

                                              In particular, the conscious people don’t feel confident to say that their consciousness has a useful function.

                                              Are there any conscious people out there willing to risk saying that their consciousness is necessary and useful, i.e. that consciousness just might have a very necessary and very useful function in the world?

                                              No one is willing to risk it. No one is willing to risk saying that consciousness is necessary and useful.

                                              So, you will never find Georgina, Steve or Ulla saying that consciousness has a very necessary and useful function in the world. Georgina, Steve and Ulla can find no use for consciousness. Georgina, Steve and Ulla seem to think that consciousness is not necessary. IF Georgina, Steve and Ulla found a use for consciousness, then they would probably be able to say what that use is. IF Georgina, Steve and Ulla thought that consciousness had a necessary function in the world, then they would probably be able to say what that function is. So, you will never find Georgina, Steve or Ulla saying that their own personal consciousness is necessary and useful. 🙁 And you will never find Georgina, Steve or Ulla saying that other people's personal consciousnesses are necessary and useful to those people, or saying that other animals' personal consciousnesses are necessary and useful to those animals. 🙁

                                                Lorraine Ford
                                                Your post shows that you haven't read the responses you have had . To knowledge gained through the senses I ougfht to add other hazzards besixdes predation.

                                                    Lorraine Ford Hi Lorraine, lol , there is a function evidently , but we have not still reached it. The conscious mind, the subconscious mind, why and how, that is the question. But there is a function and processings indeed. The sensory inputs, the thoughts, the feelings, the informations...are all important to better understand this consciousness and this intelligence is maybe a kind of transcendant consciousness where we can create and extrapolate. The adaptation and survival to our environments so are relevant at my humble opinion. We have like so a main function for this consciousness divided in several functions and complexities when the cognitive paramaters are considered. I consider philosophically a kind of main function where this pantheism, panpsychism and materialism are considered but we have not reached these parameters. But if the informations, cognitions, sensory inputs, memories, adaptations to environments are important for the reflection of senses, thoughts, feelings.....so the fact to take choices due to the cognitions seem essential and so we encode in the memory and learn and it is key because we improve the intelligence with this learning and memory and so we improve the choices even in evolving. That is why the experiences are important and this evolution. That is why the fact to be able to solve problems is also essential for the adaptation and survival and permit to live and adapt in the environments because we have this creativity .That implies now the communications and even social interactions all this . That implies now relevant extrapolations possible when we consider the universal altruism and the 3 main possible roads, panpsychism,pantheism and materialsim because we align to values and goals and intentions in function of feelings. That is why the experiences are an important key at my humble opinion with all the parameters cited above because it implies the ethical comportments even and moralities , it is a hard problem to explain physically and reach due to the parameters missing but we see the generality. We are different from mindless robots......