Science is often celebrated as humanity’s most powerful tool for uncovering the nature of reality. From the mechanics of the cosmos to the intricacies of biology, science has radically expanded our understanding and transformed the way we live. Its success, particularly when applied through technology, is undeniable. But should we take this as a sign that science is the only valid way to seek truth?
Continue readingTag Archives: consciousness
The Hard Problem of a Love-Based Society
An earlier post touched on the difficulty of building societies grounded in love, especially when viewed through the lens of evolutionary theory. In particular, the idea made famous by Richard Dawkins—that we are, in a sense, vehicles for “selfish genes”—poses a profound challenge. According to this view, the behaviors and traits that have been favored by evolution are those that enhance the survival and replication of genes, often at the expense of others. Even altruism, when it does appear, is typically explained as a strategy that ultimately serves genetic self-interest.
This perspective doesn’t necessarily mean we are doomed to be selfish in every interaction. Social cooperation, empathy, even self-sacrifice, can all arise under the right conditions. But if these behaviors are essentially byproducts of a deeper drive for genetic success, then what does it mean to hope for a society built on selfless love? Can such a vision be anything more than a noble exception to nature’s dominant rule?
Continue readingThe Conscious Universe: A Counterpoint to Cosmic Indifference
There is a statement made by Richard Dawkins that is often quoted as a succinct, simple description of the mechanistic nature of the universe. It is from his 1995 book called “River Out of Eden”:
“The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”
—Richard Dawkins in River Out of Eden, 1995.
This oft-quoted statement presents a stark view of our universe—one devoid of design, purpose, good and evil, and possessed only of “blind, pitiless indifference.” While this mechanistic perspective may appear compelling when contemplating the vastness of cosmic scales, it falters significantly when we consider the extraordinary phenomenon of consciousness that exists within this same universe.
Continue readingDismissing Experts
I recently finished reading Daniel Dennett’s book “Consciousness Explained”. It was a significant read, full of detailed arguments and illustrations. Although there were some provocative ideas in it, most of them seemed a bit dated, probably because the book is now nearly 30 years old. In addition, the tone of the writing was a little off-putting, with Dennet apparently very confident in his model, even to the point of often deprecating other possibilities in a cringy manner.
The thing is, it seems this sort of writing often shows up when the author is making a point that seems strained, not totally convincing, and it’s as if the writer knows that and feels the need to resort to emotional manipulation. Of course, it may just be the writer’s personality, but it does seem that if a writer feels the need to resort to emotional manipulation, one can’t help but imagine that this is done because even they don’t feel that the rational arguments are sufficient.
Continue readingArt, Photography, and Consciousness
In this blog, I explore metaphysical topics with an eye towards religion, mainly from a science perspective. After all, the title of the blog is taken from a speech from one of history’s great scientists. However, it’s well-known that there are limits to science, including the fact that some topics are difficult to address with scientific methods.
Because this is the case, we need to be careful with our level of certainty about topics which are not yet well understood. For example, more and more research is being conducted to understand consciousness. This is becoming increasingly relevant with the recent developments of artificial intelligence. However, there is no way to directly probe consciousness with the tools and methodologies of science; the work done by neurologists and similar and investigate things related to consciousness, but not the phenomenon itself. This is because consciousness is a strictly subjective phenomenon.
Continue readingA Different Definition of Consciousness
Definitions are important, especially when discussing complex topics. For example, the topic of consciousness is so fraught with subtleties that discussions about it really need to start with a clear definition of what it means. Definitions themselves are often the first step in exploring an idea, so creating one can be an act of investigation. In other words, proposing different definitions for a concept may help us explore what is really important or fundamental about it.
Continuing with the topic of consciousness, some define it as just information processing, some define it as the phenomenon of experience. These are very different definitions that generally reflect different metaphysical positions – strict physicalism versus somewhat more open views. I wonder if it would be possible to develop a definition based on something that cuts across these global perspectives.
Continue readingBoundaries of Physicalism
A common objection to the idea of any sort of transcendent domain is that, if that domain can affect the physical domain, then it is simply an extension of the physical domain and therefore not transcendent. As such, truly transcendent domains do not exist.
When discussing supernatural claims in particular, this argument is often used to assert that there is no such thing as the supernatural because if it can affect the natural, then it is simply a part of nature. Similarly, this argument is used to disprove mind-brain dualism since, if the mind can affect the world (specifically, the brain), then the mind cannot be immaterial because it is interacting with the material.
This objection makes sense at some level, but also seems to miss the mark when it comes to explaining the phenomena that people refer to when invoking transcendent domains like the supernatural or the mind. Even if the assertion is logically valid, it has no explanatory power and adds no detail to support exploration, model creation, testing, or any other sort of careful thinking.
Even when domains are fundamentally similar in some way, understanding is usually improved by articulating persistent differences and the nature of any boundaries and interactions.
Continue readingExtraordinary Claims About Consciousness
A famous statement by Carl Sagan suggested that extraordinary claims need to be backed by extraordinary evidence.1 It’s interesting to apply this claim to physicalist statements made about consciousness.
Continue readingTo Be Open-Minded About Consciousness
One of the basic ideas of this blog is that our understanding of reality is still incomplete, so that even though we need to live according to some beliefs, it’s probably best to realize that they can be described as hopes instead of settled facts.
An example of this sort of limited knowledge is the challenge of understanding consciousness, and in particular, how it relates to material reality. In other words, is consciousness strictly a result of physical, material processes, or does it result from something outside of these?
Many believe that the material is all there is, that the brain (generally neuroscience) is sufficient for explaining everything we observe about the mind, including the nature of consciousness and self-awareness.
Others believe that there probably is something more than just physical substance involved, that even if the brain is necessary for everything we observe about the mind, the material brain is still not sufficient to explain everything.
Such views involve assertions about the relationship between the physical and immaterial aspects of reality, and perhaps whether immaterial things even exist. Of course, this is not the only place such questions have come up.
Continue readingPicturing the Unique Nature of Consciousness
In the previous essay, I discussed the possibility that the brain is necessary to consciousness but that it is not sufficient. In other words, that there seems to be something needed beyond our current understanding of the physical. History, however, shows that science has often been challenged with such paradigm shifts.
Sometimes metaphors can help us see beyond such biases and preconceptions, so in this essay we’ll consider a picture that may illustrate why consciousness is so unique, and why it’s too early to start limiting options for explaining it.
Continue reading
Kelvin's Clouds 