3 ms·
But that doesn't align with how we use the concept of consciousness. A bug is conscious - we put a bug in a bottle - we say the bug is in a bottle. We don't sa
by mabub24 9y ago
But that doesn't align with how we use the concept of consciousness. A bug is conscious - we put a bug in a bottle - we say the bug is in a bottle. We don't say the bottle is conscious like the bug, we say the bug is conscious in a bottle. A human engulfed in fire is not a conscious fire beyond a poetic turn of phrase.
We don't say houses are conscious in the same way human's are. We might say a house is "aware of something" in the same way we say a house is "conscious of something", not to mean exhibiting the mark of the mental but to mean every person contained is aware of a certain thing; but if we're using the concept of consciousness in the way this article is using the concept, not as being aware, but as a mark of the mental, we don't ever apply that to a house because that is nonsensical. We would say "you don't mean the house, you mean the people inside."
The entire starting question seems nonsensical. If we conclude the universe, or a star, is conscious like us we've stretched the concept of consciousness to absurdity or metaphysical wankery.
- uoaei 9y agoBeing inside of something is different from being a part of something.