Which Came First: Consciousness or Matter?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

none that i know of in any language... except for this one time i remember that there was an african word for this.

a reply to: cooperton
The law of conservation of energy as stated earlier, states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, but only changed from one form into another or transferred from one object to another.

Isn't consciousness a form of energy? Can matter be created from energy?

I haven't followed up on this thread yet but I thought I would share this with you all. I created a thread about personal identity and the test you take but never mind that.

Imagine that the star trek teleportation technology exists today. A transporter's main function is to copy everything about you and sends that information elsewhere. The caveat is that it destroys you, basically killing you instantaneously but at the same time an exact duplicate of you appears elsewhere. Now what if that device malfunctions and you are still there and an exact copy of you appears elsewhere? Now who is that copy?

www.philosophersnet.com...

a reply to: cooperton

consciousness implies a process - a process implies substance - space in which different parts can work relative to each other. This is mind, it is made up of other constituents, ergo... matter existed either before consciousness or they both came into existence simultaneously.. Imo, within "space" is "conscious potential" which manifests as matter fluctuates in the system.

Matter. Consciousness periodically "wakes up" in different niches of the universe, not creating the universe or itself, but being subject to the torrent of time/space/matter.. waking up briefly and making changes to the system before the system changes so much that no one mind will last eternally (unless all of consciousness in the current universe figures out to hack this reality to circumvent such a dramatic change lolol).

a reply to: Titen-Sxull

Human Consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, without the brain we certainly would not be aware of anything and when we're dead we're DEAD.

Awareness is the keyword.

If it's a property of the brain then it is fake. You wouldn't be aware. You are already dead. Sure a robot can be "aware" of the environment and act accordingly. But is it really "aware"? Chomsky and others talked about this but they were wrong. Anything can react to something. Is a furby aware? Certainly it reacts to the environment. But is it "there"?

a reply to: WorShip

Imo, within "space" is "conscious potential" which manifests as matter fluctuates in the system.

Or it has always existed? Kinda like mathematics precede everything.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

I actually think of it like a thing without a beginning (blah blah paradox), as immutable property of reality - yet requires substance to manifest in various ways - you might say, consciousness even permeates solid rock - but there is no mechanism for consciousness to express itself in that medium.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Why, exactly, can consciousness not be part of a physical brain? You seem to be making an argument from incredulity.

We humans know the difference between someone with normal brain activity, someone in a coma, a dead person, etc and the difference in brain activity indicates just how aware and conscious these people are.

Obviously human beings don't merely react, the earliest organisms merely reacted. The earliest eye was likely a sort of photosensitive cell. After billions of years of evolution I don't find human consciousness so amazing, in comparison with other life on this planet, that we'd require some OTHER explanation (such as a useless supernatural one or a highly dubious claim to some sort of dualism or non-physical substance).

Are humans aware? Are chimps aware? Are lobsters aware? On some level the answer is yes to just about any organism and we know that the brain is the source of consciousness because when you damage, alter or switch the brain off entirely the consciousness reacts accordingly.

a reply to: WorShip

I actually think of it like a thing without a beginning (blah blah paradox), as immutable property of reality - yet requires substance to manifest in various ways - you might say, consciousness even permeates solid rock - but there is no mechanism for consciousness to express itself in that medium.

Kinda like mathematics and physical reality? Hmmm.


The more scientists study the reality the more deep they discover - there's a pattern. Ever notice that the universe follow the laws of mathematics?

But then you might be right. Both sides need each other to exist.

a reply to: Titen-Sxull

You seem to be making an argument from incredulity.

No. It seems that you didn't understand my argument. I made other posts.

We humans know the difference between someone with normal brain activity, someone in a coma, a dead person, etc and the difference in brain activity indicates just how aware and conscious these people are.

Why are you talking about that? Sighs just take the test.

Are humans aware? Are chimps aware? Are lobsters aware? On some level the answer is yes to just about any organism and we know that the brain is the source of consciousness because when you damage, alter or switch the brain off entirely the consciousness reacts accordingly.

Yes KNOCK KNOCK ON THE WOOD.

Not what I am talking about.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Hmm, yeah.. Well mathematics is a human construct - our numbers cannot ever be entirely "true" to what the universe is - but there is pattern, and order... Is this a sign of an infinity of configurations of reality, or rather that consciousness in a different niche (ergo pre big bang) formulated enough conscious coherence to make some alterations to the next "fluctuation (i.e our current universe)", in such a way that it gives rise to this order, and more diverse forms of consciousness. My personal theory is that there was a pre-big bang entity, which was the sole consciousness in a void - whom, would have gone through a process of existential suffering, probably thought it was a good idea to manipulate energy in the next universe where there were many minds and they could commune on the experience of reality in a different niche (one with galaxies/stars/planets etc). I don't think the entity created the phenomenon of experience/consciousness, rather that it was subjected to it spontaneously via matter manifestation. Sorry if my mumbo jumbo is confusing!

disclaimer: I don't necessarily believe my theory, it's just one possibility that stands out as somewhat logical to me

a reply to: WorShip

Well mathematics is a human construct

No it's actually a human discovery. We discover the laws of science and what do we discover further? They follow the "laws of mathematics". It has always been there.

Now if we are talking about quantum mechanics then hmmm ok.

a reply to: Deaf Alien

let me put it this way, numbers aren't real fundamental parts of reality, they are abstractions of the human mind. therefore mathematics isn't "real". Yes we can make some writing on the wall that follows the pattern of the universe, but it doesn't necessarily imply that the universe follows "mathematics". I don't know. Enlighten me further, it's a tricky one.

a reply to: WorShip

Yes we can make some writing on the wall that follows the pattern of the universe, but it doesn't necessarily imply that the universe follows "mathematics". I don't know. Enlighten me further, it's a tricky one.

Can the universe go contrary to mathematics?

Sure one can think 2 + 2 = 5 but will that make it a reality? Every single time we observe the universe it has always followed mathematics.

a reply to: cooperton

Matter. Atoms talk to each other . Create molecules. Interact with other indepenend molecues that have similar or different interests.
Daughter matter combine with Helium, then created solar systems. Then exploded again, then made the Earth with heavier elements.

a reply to: WorShip

Heeeey I just googled and I like what I am reading right now www.anusha.com...

a reply to: cooperton

Life existed long before the word did. Our religious texts only record our journey to become selfaware and conscious beings not the entire universes.
So the answer you are looking for is energy. And so much of it it made a big bang.

originally posted by: Titen-Sxull
So it sounds arrogantly self-important to assert that not only is this thing we have special but its a point of contact for some New Age sounding idea of God.

Never said it was unique to the human. All I know is that I am conscious right now; ergo this post.

If matter is not responsible for consciousness, then we would think consciousness to be responsible for matter and thus life. This would be God right?

Out of Body Experiences are an example of lucid dreaming reinterpreted as reality.

Both wake and dream streams of consciousness are correlated to an active cholinergic brain system... Who are we to say which is real?

originally posted by: Kratos40
a reply to: cooperton

Matter. Atoms talk to each other .

Wouldn't that make atoms conscious?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

If you look at an atom we might denote the thing is being one atom, and then you look further and you see it is not one atom, it is a number of many other things... mathematics helps us describe patterns we see, but it doesn't necessarily mean that mathematics was the tool used to manifest reality,. if consciousness is involved it could have been an intuitive thing, hard to get your head around though...

a reply to: MamaJ

** No MamaJ when you woke up as a baby, the world of matter already existed. Nothing can exist (be seen /known by an Observer) unless it has a Perimeter against a Background, so a TRI-ASPECT of Consciousness is the Minimum we can talk about. but "in the Beginning" we were all asleep / Latent in the Nothingness of the Cosmic Womb, and "matter was the Container /Perimeter of SELF.