• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Problem of Existence and Consciousness

Audie

Veteran Member
Reasonable, however what I think is more relevant is that they've never evolved brains despite being here 600+ million years compared to humans, @ ~ 6 million years if you count our ancestors

Not at all. Evolution proceeds according to what works.
The jellyfish design is immensely successful.

If it ain't fix don't broke it. Or something.

BTW-
Imagine the horror of putting your mind into a jellyfish body. Total monotony while waiting for a sea turtle to eat you.
 

Onoma

Active Member
Not at all. Evolution proceeds according to what works.

true, but evolution doesn't necessarily = increasing complexity

Viruses and bacteria evolved from the same cellular source, yet viruses evolved to become simpler while bacteria became more complex, complete opposites of each other
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Not at all. Evolution proceeds according to what works.
The jellyfish design is immensely successful.

If it ain't fix don't broke it. Or something.

BTW-
Imagine the horror of putting your mind into a jellyfish body. Total monotony while waiting for a sea turtle to eat you.
what is more amazing is the simpler forms of life can't really understand higher forms of life. so we as humans couldn't necessarily know if there are higher forms of life greater than us. because we don't have the means to test for them and we tend to work solely from a earthly experience. being conscious of self and lower forms is easily done. being conscious of higher forms isn't
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
true, but evolution doesn't necessarily = increasing complexity

Viruses and bacteria evolved from the same cellular source, yet viruses evolved to become simpler while bacteria became more complex, complete opposites of each other
and higher life forms can manipulate those viruses and bacteria without them knowing who and how it was accomplished. evolution gets augmented with higher intelligence
 

Audie

Veteran Member
true, but evolution doesn't necessarily = increasing complexity

Viruses and bacteria evolved from the same cellular source, yet viruses evolved to become simpler while bacteria became more complex, complete opposites of each other

No "But" needed for me! Been trying for years to get creationists to understand that.
 

Onoma

Active Member
Another relevant ( imo ) bit is that we are comparing a " centralized " brain ( humans ) to a " distributed " nervous system that functions like a brain ( jellies, octopi )

The human enteric system is a good example of a distributed nervous system, and it's actually able to function autonomously without the centralized brain

We consider an octopus to be able to " think ", yet it has no centralized brain, so we could attempt to say it's not " conscious " because it lacks a brain, yet somehow we say it " thinks "

This makes me question how we define things, because now we are saying that " thinking " is an emergent property in something that evolved to have no centralized brain
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Op's first question:

I think when asking this first question, we have to address that " living " and " conscious " are not the same thing ( At least according to how we define them currently )

Something can exist, be living, but not be considered conscious ( Jellies as an example )

While consciousness is considered an emergent property of the brain, there are actually known cases of people being alive and conscious while missing large portions of their brains, due to injuries, surgeries, or birth defects

In this 2007 Lancet study, doctors described an incredible medical oddity – the 44-year-old civil servant who had lived a normal life despite having an incredibly tiny brain

With an IQ of about 75. Not exactly 'normal', but definitely conscious, I would agree.

Or another example is the Chinese woman woman of 24 found to have no cerebellum in her brain ( cerebellar agenesis )

Woman of 24 found to have no cerebellum in her brain

I wouldn't see the cerebellum as particularly relevant for consciousness (as opposed to the cerebrum).

Irc, there's even a case, iirc, where a woman was found to have nothing but her brain stem yet she functioned almost completely normally

I am very skeptical of this one. Can you find a link? With nothing above the brain stem, she would not have language functioning, planning, emotions, or any number of other characteristics necessary for normal functioning.

If " consciousness " is still an " emergent property " of a damaged / incomplete brain, then how can we define being " conscious " on the standard of having a normal undamaged brain or even brains in general ?

Exactly how consciousness arises from brain activity is still unknown, of course. While damage to parts of the brain will lead to deficits, it does not seem to eliminate consciousness until the brain stem is suppressed. it also seems that each module in the brain contributes its own 'piece' of consciousness.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Another relevant ( imo ) bit is that we are comparing a " centralized " brain ( humans ) to a " distributed " nervous system that functions like a brain ( jellies, octopi )

The human enteric system is a good example of a distributed nervous system, and it's actually able to function autonomously without the centralized brain

We consider an octopus to be able to " think ", yet it has no centralized brain, so we could attempt to say it's not " conscious " because it lacks a brain, yet somehow we say it " thinks "

This makes me question how we define things, because now we are saying that " thinking " is an emergent property in something that evolved to have no centralized brain

I'm not willing to say that octopi are not conscious, although I would say that they would have a very different *type* of consciousness than humans.
 

Onoma

Active Member
I am very skeptical of this one. Can you find a link? With nothing above the brain stem, she would not have language functioning, planning, emotions, or any number of other characteristics necessary for normal functioning.

I'll look for it. Iirc, it was a unique case where a woman ended up having multiple surgeries and even after having most of her brain removed, still functioned normally ( Not enough to work, drive a car, etc, but enough to talk, converse ). This was attributed to plasticity, iirc
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
is consciousness only an earthly phenomena?
It's a word with a variety of meanings. I'll take it to mean "self-awareness" here and you can correct me if you have some other definition in mind.

It's only found in the living brains of particular species. I'm not aware of a definition sufficiently specific for us to reliably determine which living things have it and which don't, but we imply from certain animal behaviors that it's not limited to humans.
is electrical impulses only an earthly phenomena?
I take it you mean bioelectricity? By definition that's only found in living things, and the only place we presently know living things exist is on Earth.
once an earthly form collapses does it cease to exist in some other form or as energy?
I dare say the energy part of it doesn't cease to exist, but it ceases to be relevant. On death it irreversibly loses any form useful to the mentation of the deceased's brain (as well as the formerly living cells of the nerves, muscles, organs, and so on).

And from then on we're dead, and that's the end of the story.

In particular, we have no reason to think that any part of the living person can exist after the irreversible cessation of the life of the body ─ there's no evidence of a 'soul' or 'ghost' or 'disembodied consciousness' as an entity having objective existence, no clear hypothesis as to how any such thing could exist (let alone such an hypothesis expressed in falsifiable terms) ─ and ample evidence pointing to these things existing only as concepts / things imagined in individual (live) brains.
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
is consciousness only an earthly phenomena?

is electrical impulses only an earthly phenomena?

once an earthly form collapses does it cease to exist in some other form or as energy?

Unknown
No
See 1st law of thermodynamics
 

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
is consciousness only an earthly phenomena?

is electrical impulses only an earthly phenomena?

once an earthly form collapses does it cease to exist in some other form or as energy?
Philosophizing about that now, and by now I mean since many years and for years to come.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
it seems is generally an ego centric view again as if the earth is the center of the universe.

some believe an earthly brain is necessary for consciousness,

That is not at all what @Polymath257 said.

this would then mean consciousness can only exist on earth

No. It would mean that consciousness is something brains do - earthly or otherwise. That it is a function of a material object, as opposed to an independent entity / thing by itself.

If extra-terrestrial life also has consciousness, they'ld have the material equivalent of what we know as a brain which would be producing that consciousness.
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
it seems is generally an ego centric view again as if the earth is the center of the universe.

some believe an earthly brain is necessary for consciousness, this would then mean consciousness can only exist on earth

As we have had astronauts on the moon and they remained conscious, I would say that disproves the hypothesis that consciousness can only exist on earth. Wouldn't you agree?
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
is consciousness only an earthly phenomena?

is electrical impulses only an earthly phenomena?

once an earthly form collapses does it cease to exist in some other form or as energy?

Consciousness is a biological phenomena that developed as an adaptive behavior advantage for those organisms that developed increasing complexity of representation of their relationship to their environment. There is no reason to believe that this same biological development could not happen anywhere else with similar supportive environments to allow similar biological evolutionary processes. So the answer is it is definitely possible but we have not yet detected it.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Consciousness is a biological phenomena that developed as an adaptive behavior advantage for those organisms that developed increasing complexity of representation of their relationship to their environment. There is no reason to believe that this same biological development could not happen anywhere else with similar supportive environments to allow similar biological evolutionary processes. So the answer is it is definitely possible but we have not yet detected it.
More like inevitable, I'd say.

But you gotta have hands.

Or anyway, if you are smart, and, want to get in trouble.
 
Top