How Close is Science to Understanding Consciousness?

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by guthrio

Dustin,
...long time no see!

ya good to be momentarily back, been focusing on taking in other sorts of perspectives which fall outside of what is formilar for me, same as much of the general focus of this forum once was for me

Originally Posted by guthrio

Even while we question, the answer remains the Same for All, and for all Time.

"and for all Time." - I've heard of the ultimate end point being called the changeless; not entirely sure how I feel about it; within our perspective of time, absolutely it would be changeless, but I wonder if the changeless for the changeless is so? If nothing ever happens/changes can a thing be conscious?

[guthrio]

Originally Posted by Dustin

ya good to be momentarily back, been focusing on taking in other sorts of perspectives which fall outside of what is formilar for me, same as much of the general focus of this forum once was for me



"and for all Time." - I've heard of the ultimate end point being called the changeless; not entirely sure how I feel about it; within our perspective of time, absolutely it would be changeless, but I wonder if the changeless for the changeless is so? If nothing ever happens/changes can a thing be conscious?

Dustin,

I think it was presumptuous of me to opine about All Time, because I cannot even account for what's going to happen in the next second, much less all the seconds I've been alive. To a Being Who contains all potentials for change within Itself, (including whether I know or do not know this), I can't conceive how anything I do or think would matter. To a Being Who is Eternity and Life Itself, my ideas about Time don't really matter....even if I am included within Its Existence.

What would "change" even mean to such a Being? I have no idea, but I can certainly have a lot of wrong ones....

Thus goes my journey of hoping to grow and learn what the truly correct ideas are...because, as far as I'm concerned, whatever the Truth is, It Is That.

Hope this helps...

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Dustin

I understand things, such as that of love and consciousness, as relating to a dimensional framework relevant to the structural creation and current moment within the universe, everything relating to a scale of consciousness which for me resolves the issue in trying to equate human experience of consciousness and love with structures and experiences which to us can seem quiet different; but I'm curious how it is that you understand it all? If "consciousness isn't the be all of existence" then what are your thoughts?

My thoughts are a response of my brain to stimuli. What else would they be? Consciousness does not exist in all species, let alone in all humans at all times (dreamless sleep for instance). Then there are issues concerning brain damage and losing memories, awareness, etc. Then we have to consider that most of the universe is non-organic, 'lifeless'. What's so special about us in this regard compared to the rest of the species on earth? Why do we single out consciousness and not all the remarkable characteristics in other species? Why do humans and their experience of existing deserve special attention to the point we place ourselves on a throne?

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by guthrio

Dustin,

I think it was presumptuous of me to opine about All Time, because I cannot even account for what's going to happen in the next second, much less all the seconds I've been alive. To a Being Who contains all potentials for change within Itself, (including whether I know or do not know this), I can't conceive how anything I do or think would matter. To a Being Who is Eternity and Life Itself, my ideas about Time don't really matter....even if I am included within Its Existence.

What would "change" even mean to such a Being? I have no idea, but I can certainly have a lot of wrong ones....

Thus goes my journey of hoping to grow and learn what the truly correct ideas are...because, as far as I'm concerned, whatever the Truth is, It Is That.

Hope this helps...

sounds good - I equally, oviously, could say nothing more than you did.

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by Altair

My thoughts are a response of my brain to stimuli. What else would they be?

Oh sorry when I said "what are your thoughts" I wasn't actually trying to literally ask what thoughts are, I was trying to ask about how you view of existence ie. if consciousness isn't the end all then what do you think about the universe and existence.?

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Oh sorry when I said "what are your thoughts" I wasn't actually trying to literally ask what thoughts are, I was trying to ask about how you view of existence ie. if consciousness isn't the end all then what do you think about the universe and existence.?

Oh LOL, I indeed thought () you meant literally there..

I don’t claim to have the answers to your question. However, we can understand that humans are an earth species (tiny dot in a solar system, which is a tiny dot in our galaxy, which is one of trillions of galaxies). We are *unique* but so is everything else. We single out ourselves and place ourselves on a pedestal in all religion. Are you capable of avoiding teleology when you make claims concerning consciousness?

[Dustin]

Originally Posted by Altair

I don’t claim to have the answers to your question. However, we can understand that humans are an earth species (tiny dot in a solar system, which is a tiny dot in our galaxy, which is one of trillions of galaxies). We are *unique* but so is everything else.

no actually that is the answer to my question in that I was only asking what you thought. I think it's a beautiful stand point to view everything as so vast and our place within it so tiny, it allows for so much

physics, much the same as spirituality and theology, work through the use of basic principles, in the case of many modern religions - ideas, which work to greatly reduce it all

Originally Posted by Altair

We single out ourselves and place ourselves on a pedestal in all religion.

That could be. In much of spirituality however when people say consciousness they aren't limiting they're use of the term to human consciousness. For me I don't consider inorganic matter to be conscious but I do have to consider it in a way in that organic matter originates from it. For me I consider a living planet (that's a planet such as Earth which has an electromagnetic field) to have some form of consciousness, perhaps one greatly unformilllar to me, perhaps one which has many qualities which would function differently. A dead planet (such as Mars, a planet with no electromagnetic field) I would not consider to be conscious. Bacteria, Cells, Organisms, Plants, and all species of animals I would consider to have some and differing form of consciousness. I even believe / am in the process of publishing my own theory of reality wherein I cover my reasons for belief in a consciousness relevant model of reality which is ulitimately consciousness based however through a certain process it creates inanimate matter and thus allows for the possibility for matter to both come from consciousness and for consciousness to come from matter.

Originally Posted by Altair

Are you capable of avoiding teleology when you make claims concerning consciousness?

Had to look up teleology: "The philosophical interpretation of natural phenomena as exhibiting purpose or design." - included as a note to self, plus for others.

Somewhat. I would say that my theory has made use of priorly existing philosophical interpretations, such helped to guide its development a bit however the theory just so happens to agree with each new scientific discovery which I come across and I've been told from someone who would know that my theory dirived unique interpretation of what happens in a blackhole actually agrees with General Relativity.

As far as "exhibiting purpose or design" my theory I do believe avoids such. I do see the universe created in a very specific way however through such a process that consciousness has to first become unconsciousness so... it's kind of like taking two chemicals and mixing them together, the initial effect was you but the reaction is a property of Physics/Chemistry. So a question which may arise from a universe created from unconsciousness is, one why even have the precursor of consciousness, and two doesn't that make it the typical universe which is just chemical and physical interactions? The answer to the second question is no and how it is so is the same in that your body is a solid construct of matter but between atoms and between subatomic particles there are vast spaces; the vacuum which is a very difficult to describe thing, in that it express incredible energetic potential and yet is invisable to our every sense, is everywhere, it's within every space; so my answer is that even through I believe the universe is initially an unconscious creation, I also believe that a subtler source, from with it, created it and exists at all spaces within. AUM is a Spiritual/theological stand point of understanding creation, the Hindu religion is one of the many which make use of it; within AUM there is Brahma; to understand my theory, basically I take "A" and "M", mix them together to create the inanimate "U"; and within "A", "M", and "U" exists at all possible tempral and spacial dimensions Brahma.

[7luminaries]

Originally Posted by Guthrio

Looking for consciousness inside the brain is like looking inside the radio for the announcer" - Nassim Haramein"

...

Per the following from the article The Unified Space Memory Network (2nd reference below):

Guthrio, well said, agreed. And these quotes explain it nicely from a rather more technical perspective on consciousness.

Consciousness (including individuated consciousness from the point of individuation) exists outside of spacetime, and therefore certainly is antecedent to it. Spatially, it would be better to conceive of it more concentrically, such that it is the "infinite background" which fully contains (and fully permeates) this material multiverse.

Consciousness is what we would call "eternal", meaning, it has always existed, and is not essentially or ultimately bound by the materiality of this universe or multiverse.

We might say, very narrowly, that our individuated consciousness moves in and out of incarnation in the material realm (multiverse), with momentary transitions between these stages or phases. Which gives the illusion to some of incarnations being isolated and solitary. Of being materially reductionist (where some purport that we "cease to exist" as eternal consciousness when the temporal body passes away).

To those who desperately and often slavishly cling to some form of material reductionism...I'll grant that it does seem emotionally far simpler and thus easier for many. That is, material reductionism does seem to promise no consequences to anything we do or say (or think or intend) and (by means of misdirection) it does offer freedom from deeper transformation and growth.

But alas, regardless of what we purport or believe -- and regardless of how these beliefs may seem to aid or misdirect us -- the fact remains that we are sentient, self-aware consciousness. And ultimately, regardless of our current form (sex, size, colour, etc.), we can never be other than what we are, no matter how we try to resist or thrash against this foundational truth.

To those who have difficulty accepting big truths...and for certain, that is understandable enough...then I say, very kindly, if we think it's one and done, and no consequences or ownership.... hahahahahaha!!! Sigh...sorry mates, but that's not how it works. Your load is always there for you till you deal with it...at core, no one else can do that for you but you, although we can support one another on our journeys. This is why the present moment is always the only time, the right time, and best time to awaken and to live from centre in authentic love toward self, others, and all that is.

No matter how long you require, in this multiverse or the next (LOL)...you are always and only ever what and who you are. If you are sentient and self-aware, then you will grow into your emotional and spiritual maturity and evolve more or less quickly. Or, you will remain wherever you need to be in order to grasp those key lessons at the level of the "soul", or, your eternal, individuated, fractal consciousness.

Peace & blessings
7L

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Dustin

no actually that is the answer to my question in that I was only asking what you thought. I think it's a beautiful stand point to view everything as so vast and our place within it so tiny, it allows for so much

It does, doesn’t it? LOL! It is perplexing and deeply fascinating.

physics, much the same as spirituality and theology, work through the use of basic principles, in the case of many modern religions - ideas, which work to greatly reduce it all

I wish spirituality was a bit more like science though. Spirituality usually creates foundations that are not proven and are shaky and anthropocentric. I love the principle of parsimony in science, but applying it to spirituality is usually not met with open arms.

I’m not a human supremacist so I always take other species into account and trying to avoid human hubris. Humans are just one more page (small page) in the history of life on earth.

We experience self awareness, conceptualize our happiness, our suffering. Who’s to say that is universal? To suggest we’re “the end game” would be profoundly arrogant. We simply cannot put ourselves on a pedestal, and with it, our experience of consciousness. We happen to be who we are. Earth happens to have organisms. Jupiter is a totally different planet. What gives? Why do we single out our planet and our kind as extraordinarily more important?

I’m on my phone. Will check the rest of your reply later!

[7luminaries]

Altair, hello there.
Science (at least physics and cosmology) have been continually revising and modifying their paradigms, to the point of essentially adopting a flexible and ongoing revisionist approach. Everything is maybe and potentially, and not hard or fixed. And that is why those sciences IMO are philosophically more advanced and progressive than most others. Granted, they've been getting more openly comfortable with quantum mechanics for at least the last half century and that has required making room for a lot of expansive thought.

But the thing is, requiring certainty of paradigms OR even measurement in a quantum reality is a mindset and an emotional preference, one which they've largely had to get over. 1) Chucking out fixed paradigms and slavish adherence to fixed or rigid paradigms and 2) allowing tentative and more momentary acceptance of any incomplete paradigm has become the norm in physics and cosmology...and that's a brilliant and wonderful thing. The incomplete paradigm is more seen as something to which we may add, clarify, or even modify wholly.

The truth is what is important, and not our emotional, human preference for wanting to be able to know and further, to touch or measure "concretely" what we know. Many of us are driven to know and to learn, of course. What many of us must come to accept is near-total uncertainty at all times in what is perceived as "known". That is something many have struggled with throughout the ages and not just in the modern sciences. As that both defines the true hubris of humanity as well as a known, historical emotional weakness of the species. We must learn to accept our reality as it is -- near-total uncertainty -- whilst of course still moving ahead and planning for future with the best knowledge and wisdom we have at hand.

Most scientists may not yet realise it, but that freedom and flexibility IS the beating heart of science. Like in Buddhism, holding only tentatively and almost ephemerally to any paradigm or mindset concerning how reality works...and allowing for maximum exploration and constant revision and learning...in order to go where no (hu)man has gone before

There is great parsimony is spirituality as well, regardless of the infinite multiplicity of life and of consciousness. However, as it takes time to observe our physical reality & then fold in the detail and roll up the equations to simply present our physical laws...likewise it takes time to experientially acquire wisdom (lifetimes, most say) and to simply and directly live from centre, open to immediacy and illumination of this moment. I always think of Peter Sellers in an old classic, Being Here.

Peace & blessings
7L