4 ms·
Although these ideas of panpsychism are popular and exciting to the mind, i would remind that mainstream cognitive science / neuroscience considers consciousnes
by buboard 7y ago
Although these ideas of panpsychism are popular and exciting to the mind, i would remind that mainstream cognitive science / neuroscience considers consciousness a deterministic outcome of the laws of nature we know acting on the neural tissue of live humans.
- colordrops 7y agoThe problem with this is that consciousness pre-existed cognitive science / neuroscience and is the substrate upon which they are built, and not the other way around, so it is an illusion that they are on the outside looking
- buboard 7y agoConsciousness did not pre-exist natural laws. Consciousness was invented by mammal brains. The problem with panpsychism is that statements like the one you made are not only unfalsifiable, they cannot be probed empirically or even philosophically.
- colordrops 7y agoThe universe doesn't guarantee that its truths can be revealed through falsifiable or philosophical methods.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- buboard 7y agothis is exactly the kind of open-ended, vacuuous statement i m talking about
- colordrops 7y agoInsults only detract from understanding. I'll be more specific. The experience of existing is the first layer of reality. Through this experience sensations are correlated and models built. These models, such as the ideas of "consciousness", "flasifiability", and "philosophy", are only that - models and constructs - and not base level reality. The only way to understand the base level is to turn inward and observe the experiencing itself. This for example is an aspect of the practice of Zen. Is Zen vacuous because it's not empirical or philosophical?