What you actually mean by 'Consciousness'?

[Martin]

That is quite simple. I just say now I am talking of universal (quantum/gravitational) consciousness. The other times I may be talking of human consciousness (social, economic, religious, etc.).

Gravity is a force - how can it be a type of consciousness, practically speaking?

 

[Martin]

The only objective evidence is that a dead body is not conscious. Therefore, consciousness belongs to a functional body of a living being (human, animal, tree, algi, virus, any). >> As we go down to simpler and simpler live forms, consciousness turns into chemical reaction, e.g., virus. It does not have a consciousness where a brain is required. I do not think it is difficult to understand unless someone ties him/herself into religious knots. Think simple.
Buddha is generally not wrong. Yes, consciousness depends on the conditions. There should be someone to observe and something to observe. The observer should have all the paraphernalia for observation, etc. My homage to my guru, Gautama, the Buddha.

Yes, it does appear that consciousness depends on living biological organisms, and there doesn't seem to be any evidence for the idea that consciousness exists independently of living organisms, or that consciousness permeates the universe, or whatever. These are essentially religious beliefs. I do find these ideas intriguing, and I have an open mind about them. On the other hand though, I'm not impressed by the kind of faith-based rhetoric you see in these discussions. It's really just a repetition of dogma, with possibilities being presented as conclusions. I think a simple "don't know" is more credible on questions like this.
So for example, saying that consciousness is present in deep sleep sounds feasible, but saying that consciousness is present in a dead body sounds absurd.

As for atoms and rocks reacting, I don't think that makes them living organisms, so I don't see how they can be "conscious" in any meaningful sense of the word. Rocks and atoms react to external forces, but I don't think that makes them "aware" of those forces. It's like saying that a billiard ball is "aware" of being impacted by another ball, which doesn't sound right.

 

[Martin]

You have made the question difficult. Does my pant exist in legs or my legs exist in the pant!
Consciousness is not a casket or container (talking of modern computer usage) that the dead body will exist in it.
The atoms in the body are as conscious as they were before. What is not there is human consciousness because the light are off in the brain. That is a necessary requirement for human consciousness. As I said keep it simple, keep it uncomplicated, and you will have all the answers.

I'm all for simplicity, but saying that atoms are "conscious" sounds complicated to me. Clearly this is nothing like human consciousness, so there are more questions than answers.

 

[SalixIncendium]

You have made the question difficult. Does my pant exist in legs or my legs exist in the pant!
Consciousness is not a casket or container (talking of modern computer usage) that the dead body will exist in it.
The atoms in the body are as conscious as they were before. What is not there is human consciousness because the light are off in the brain. That is a necessary requirement for human consciousness. As I said keep it simple, keep it uncomplicated, and you will have all the answers.

Do you make a distinction between "human consciousness" and the Atman (Brahman)? What are the qualities of human consciousness? What do you perceive as the differences between "human consciousness" and Brahman?

 

[SalixIncendium]

It doesn't exhibit signs of consciousness.

What are these "signs of consciousness?"

 

[SalixIncendium]

Yes, it does appear that consciousness depends on living biological organisms, and there doesn't seem to be any evidence for the idea that consciousness exists independently of living organisms, or that consciousness permeates the universe, or whatever. These are essentially religious beliefs. I do find these ideas intriguing, and I have an open mind about them. On the other hand though, I'm not impressed by the kind of faith-based rhetoric you see in these discussions. It's really just a repetition of dogma, with possibilities being presented as conclusions. I think a simple "don't know" is more credible on questions like this.
So for example, saying that consciousness is present in deep sleep sounds feasible, but saying that consciousness is present in a dead body sounds absurd.

Think of it like this. Did radio waves exist before Heinrich Hertz picked them up on a coil transmitter's antenna? Before he did, what was the evidence they existed?

Just because there is not a medium for evidence of consciousness doesn't mean it doesn't exist in the absence of that medium.

 

[Koldo]

What are these "signs of consciousness?"

Essentially responsiveness.

 

[Koldo]

Think of it like this. Did radio waves exist before Heinrich Hertz picked them up on a coil transmitter's antenna? Before he did, what was the evidence they existed?

Just because there is not a medium for evidence of consciousness doesn't mean it doesn't exist in the absence of that medium.

I agree. But there is no reason to assume that consciousness is akin to radio waves.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Gravity is a force - how can it be a type of consciousness, practically speaking?

if the a system in the universe is affected by something happening in another system a 100 light-years away, then it is some sort of consciousness.

As for atoms and rocks reacting, I don't think that makes them living organisms, so I don't see how they can be "conscious" in any meaningful sense of the word. Rocks and atoms react to external forces, but I don't think that makes them "aware" of those forces. It's like saying that a billiard ball is "aware" of being impacted by another ball, which doesn't sound right.

When did I make them living objects? I said the non-living (and atoms too, even in our own body) have a different kind of consciousness. Meaningful sense: Now you are putting your meaning into the equation. A billiard ball becomes aware of another billiard ball as soon as it starts moving. The gravitational field is changed even if in a nearly non-calculable amount.

I'm all for simplicity, but saying that atoms are "conscious" sounds complicated to me. Clearly this is nothing like human consciousness, so there are more questions than answers.

The basic fact that you have to agree, if you are a person of science, is that the atoms, any atom for that matter is aware of its surrounding and is affected by it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you make a distinction between "human consciousness" and the Atman (Brahman)? What are the qualities of human consciousness? What do you perceive as the differences between "human consciousness" and Brahman?

I do. And that is a point of contention between me and the universal consciousnessvala (now this an India way to address those who believe in universal consciousness. It goes like this that if your grandfather was selling bottles, then your surname may be 'Batlivala' and if he was selling liquor, then your surname may be 'Daruvala', Daru - Liquor/wine. Just as you have Shoemakers or Smith in West) which, as I said, I do not conflate with human consciousness.
Human consciousness is through brain, the consciousness of Brahman is the consciousness of energy or you can say Quantum Mechanics.

 

[Martin]

if the a system in the universe is affected by something happening in another system a 100 light-years away, then it is some sort of consciousness.
When did I make them living objects? I said the non-living (and atoms too, even in our own body) have a different kind of consciousness. Meaningful sense: Now you are putting your meaning into the equation. A billiard ball becomes aware of another billiard ball as soon as it starts moving. The gravitational field is changed even if in a nearly non-calculable amount.

The basic fact that you have to agree, if you are a person of science, is that the atoms, any atom for that matter is aware of its surrounding and is affected by it.

Sure, an atom or rock or billiard ball reacts to changes in its environment.
But I wouldn't call this kind of reaction "consciousness". You could call it awareness, I suppose, and perhaps these reactions are not so different to those of simple biological organisms, eg a plant turning its leaves towards the sun.

Again it depends on how we define the term "consciousness". I would associate it with higher mammals in general, and humans in particular. In these terms, human consciousness looks much more sophisticated than the the crude "awareness" of atoms, rocks, billiard balls and plants. If you want to call that crude awareness "Brahman", that's fine, though I suspect many of your Advaita colleagues would be rather skeptical.

 

[Martin]

Think of it like this. Did radio waves exist before Heinrich Hertz picked them up on a coil transmitter's antenna? Before he did, what was the evidence they existed?

Just because there is not a medium for evidence of consciousness doesn't mean it doesn't exist in the absence of that medium.

Sure, it's a possibility. Is this what you believe?
Currently we only know about living creatures as a "medium" for consciousness.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Essentially responsiveness.

Are you of the opinion that plants are conscious?

 

[SalixIncendium]

I agree. But there is no reason to assume that consciousness is akin to radio waves.

I never did. I was analogizing.

If someone was ignorant to the existence of, or more accurately the origin of, radio waves and saw a radio playing, they might think the signal was a product of the radio coming from the radio. Just like if one might be ignorant to the transcendence of consciousness, one might think consciousness was a product of the brain.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Sure, it's a possibility. Is this what you believe?

It's a theory. A hypothetical, so to speak. If it better suits your sensibilities, you can call it a belief.

Currently we only know about living creatures as a "medium" for consciousness.

Actually, we don't. We really "know" surprisingly little about consciousness.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Are you of the opinion that plants are conscious?

Oh Salix, I did not expect you to ask this question. Of course, each flower or leaf or a blade of grass is fully conscious.

Plants have sensibilities, but are they conscious?

Jagdish Chandra Bose: "His major contribution in the field of biophysics was the demonstration of the electrical nature of the conduction of various stimuli (e.g., wounds, chemical agents) in plants, which were earlier thought to be of a chemical nature. In order to understand the heliotropic movements of plants (the movement of a plant towards a light source), Bose invented a torsional recorder. He found that light applied to one side of the sunflower caused turbot to increase on the opposite side. These claims were later proven experimentally. He was also the first to study the action of microwaves in plant tissues and corresponding changes in the cell membrane potential." (Wikipedia)

Of course, Bhagawat Purana said two thousand years ago that plants have life. There is a whole Gita about that (Vyadha Gita - Song of the Pious Butcher).

 

[SalixIncendium]

Oh Salix, I did not expect you to ask this question. Of course, science has proved that each flower or leaf or a blade of grass is fully conscious.

I wasn't asking if plants were conscious. I was asking @Koldo for their opinion.

And sun isn't the only thing to which plants respond...

 

[atanu]

By waking up afterwards. By having others notice that I am asleep. By experiencing the end of the process of waking up. I recognize that there was a gap in consciousness.

Haha. How do you recognise there was a gap if it was not experienced and if it is not in memory? Furthermore, most people also remember "I slept peacefully".

 

[Polymath257]

Haha. How do you recognise there was a gap if it was not experienced and if it is not in memory? Furthermore, most people also remember "I slept peacefully".

I recognize a gap because I *don't* have memory for that time. I recall the drift into sleep and the gradual lifting when waking up, but I have no memories of the interval in between. My *memory* has a gap as shown by a comparison with events in the rest of the world (position of sun, light or dark, etc).

I say I slept peacefully if I feel refreshed when I wake up. I have no memory of the sleep itself.

 

[Koldo]

Are you of the opinion that plants are conscious?

No. Although it depends on what you mean by consciousness. I consider the capacity to think as a requirement, and I haven't come across any evidence that suggests plants think.