Consciousness Primacy Claim: A Critical Survey of 40 Philosophical Frameworks on Ultimate Reality's Awareness
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
<rlpvimal@yahoo.co.in>Dear All,
We have investigated the "Consciousness Primacy Claim: A Critical Survey of 40 Philosophical Frameworks on Ultimate Reality's Awareness," particularly focusing on whether Brahman is eternally conscious. Please share your views on each of the 40 frameworks. Please review the attachment.
4. Table 3: Analysis of 40 Frameworks
1. Summary:
Is the Source Fully Conscious (aware)? Answer Key: <Yes: 29>, <No: 3 (Modern Materialistic Science, Buddhism, Cārvāka/Lokāyata)>, <Partially: 1 (Confucianism)
Does the source have the potential for consciousness? <Yes: 7 (DPV~ICRDAM, Transpersonal Psychology, Perennial Philosophy, Process Philosophy, Eco-Philosophy, Symbiotic Existential Cosmology (ICAM/SEC), and Mystical Art-Experience Framework>.
2. Table 3 related to sources and nature in 40 Vedantic and Non-Vedantic Frameworks
|
A. Framework |
B. Is the source fully conscious and aware? |
C. Nature of Full Consciousness vs Human Consciousness |
D. Experience of Redness/Grayness |
|
1. Brahma Sūtra Vedānta (BSV: Both NB & SB) |
Yes - as foundational principle. Śruti pramāṇa (scriptural authority) + anumāna (inference) from Upaniṣadic statements like "sarvam khalvidam brahma". |
Unlimited, non-dual awareness without subject-object division; transcends sensory categories. Textual analysis of Brahma Sūtras revealing consciousness as foundational principle vs. human consciousness as derivative. |
Neither redness nor grayness - pure awareness beyond phenomenal qualities. Scriptural testimony that Brahman transcends sensory categories; neither redness nor grayness apply. |
|
2. Bhedābheda Vedānta (BAV) Primarily SB with NB substrate |
Yes - consciousness is inherent. Sākṣātkāra (direct realization) showing simultaneous unity-difference + śāstra validation |
Simultaneous unity and multiplicity awareness; experiences both universal and particular simultaneously. Dialectical reasoning (tarka) demonstrating how one consciousness appears as many while remaining one |
Experiences redness AND grayness as unified-yet-distinct manifestations. Experiential verification through meditative states where unity and multiplicity are simultaneously experienced.
|
|
3. Advaita Vedānta (AV) NB (absolute priority) |
Yes: consciousness is Brahman's very nature and pure consciousness is eternal in NB through aparokṣa jñāna (direct knowledge) through nirvikalpa samādhi + mahāvākya contemplation. However, there is no subjective or objective evidence. |
Pure consciousness (śuddha cit (शुद्ध चित्)) without modifications; human consciousness is Brahman veiled by māyā. Adhyāsa (superimposition) analysis showing human consciousness as Brahman + ignorance (avidyā). |
Neither - all phenomenal experience is illusory; only pure awareness remains. Transcendental insight that all phenomenal experience dissolves in pure consciousness; sensory qualities are māyā. |
|
4. Cit-Acit Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta (CAV): SB (with cit-acit attributes) |
Yes - as conscious controller. Śaraṇāgati (शरणागति surrender) + bhakti-yoga revealing Brahman's conscious control of all attributes |
Omniscient consciousness with complete knowledge of all attributes and modes.
Comparison methodology showing finite consciousness as mode (prakāra) of infinite consciousness |
Experiences all qualities including redness and grayness as real attributes of manifestation.
Devotional experience where all qualities are experienced as real manifestations of divine consciousness. |
|
5. Dvaitādvaita Vedānta (DAV) SB (personal aspect primary) |
Yes - personal consciousness. Guru-paramparā transmission + bheda-abheda realization through rasa-līlā contemplation |
Divine consciousness that maintains both identity and difference with creation. Paradoxical logic (acintya-yukti) transcending rational categories of same/different. |
Experiences redness as divine quality, grayness as creation's limitation, both as real. Devotional rasa where divine and human consciousness are experienced as simultaneously one and different. |
|
6. Dvaita Vedānta (DV) SB (completely personal) |
Yes - as supreme person (Viṣṇu). Pratyakṣa (perception) of fundamental difference + āgama (scriptural) authority of Viṣṇu's supremacy |
Perfect personal consciousness with complete independence; radically different from finite consciousness. Taratamya (gradation) principle showing hierarchical differences in consciousness. |
Experiences all sensory qualities perfectly as the supreme experiencer, including redness. Bhakti-sādhana revealing perfect divine perception vs. limited human perception. |
|
7. Śuddhādvaita Vedānta (SAV) SB (pure consciousness-bliss) |
Yes - pure consciousness is fundamental. Puṣṭi (divine grace) + sevā-bhāva (service attitude) revealing Brahman's pure bliss-consciousness. |
Non-dual consciousness that is inherently blissful; māyā is Brahman's creative power, not illusion. Līlā-tattva understanding consciousness as eternal play vs. human consciousness as temporal participation. |
Experiences redness as pure manifestation of consciousness-bliss; no distinction between qualities. Rasa-anubhava where all sensory experience is divine bliss; no distinction between qualities |
|
8. Achintya-Bhedābheda Vedānta (ABAV) SB (Krishna as Bhagavan) |
Yes - as inconceivable divine consciousness. Acintya-śakti (inconceivable power) realization through harināma-saṅkīrtana. |
Inconceivable consciousness that transcends logical categories of same/different. Inconceivable logic (acintya-yukti) transcending rational understanding of consciousness. |
Inconceivably experiences both redness and grayness while being beyond both. Bhāva-samādhi in divine love where contradictory experiences are simultaneously real. |
|
9. Vijñāna Vedānta (VV) Both NB & SB in dynamic unity |
Yes - consciousness-force (cit-śakti). Integral yoga combining jñāna, bhakti, karma, and rāja-yoga for supermind realization. |
Supermind (vijñāna) - integral consciousness combining knowledge and creative power. Evolutionary epistemology tracking consciousness-force development from matter to supermind. |
Experiences redness and grayness as manifestations of consciousness-force in evolution. Supramental perception experiencing all qualities as consciousness-force evolutionary manifestations. |
|
10. DPV~ICRDAM Both NB (in S1 ~ S7 states of cosmos in HCC) & SB (in S2-S6 states of cosmos) in cyclic phases |
Yes, the potentiality of consciousness in NB (state S1, S7) exists. Individual consciousness (CSEs) is actualized in DA_ADS_SB (state S4: 9.8 to 13.7998 billion years after BB)[i] through bottom-up approach. If Vedanta is correct, then through top-down approach, full consciousness might have arosed during phase transition from neutral NB-phase to DA_SB~DA_UF (unified field) due to temperature drop from BB to pre-Planck epoch (before 10-43 s). |
Dual-aspect consciousness that undergoes cyclic transformations; consciousness and physical as inseparable aspects. Dual-aspect analysis revealing inseparable complementarity of subjective and physical dimensions.
Contemplative methodology combining scientific observation with meditative insight into neutral awareness for NB and dual-aspect awareness in SB. For example, meditating on stone, we will experience both is protoC (s-aspect) and physical properties as ns-aspect. |
In S4 state/phase of cosmos with ΛCDM: trichroms/achromat ADS experiences redness/grayness as integrated dual-aspect phenomena. phenomenology in S4 phase where trichromat/achromat experiences (s-asect) and their neural-physical activities (ns-aspect) are dual-aspect manifestations. |
|
11. Modern Materialistic Science |
No - consciousness emerges from complex brain processes |
Emergent property of neurobiological processes; no fundamental consciousness |
Neither - no experiencer exists at fundamental level; redness/grayness are subjective constructions of evolved brains |
|
12. Nyāya |
Yes - Īśvara as omniscient consciousness |
Perfect knowledge (sarvajñatva, सर्वज्ञत्व, omniscience) with complete awareness of all objects and their properties |
Experiences redness as real property of objects; divine knowledge includes all sensory qualities perfectly |
|
13. Vaiśeṣika |
Yes - through atomic consciousness principles |
Consciousness associated with eternal souls (ātman) interacting with atomic reality |
Experiences qualities through direct atomic composition awareness; redness as real viśeṣa (particular quality) |
|
14. Yoga (Patañjali) |
Yes - Puruṣa as pure consciousness witness |
Isolated pure consciousness (kaivalya) beyond all modifications |
Neither redness nor grayness - pure consciousness transcends all sensory content and mental modifications |
|
15. Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika-Yoga Science |
Yes - integrated consciousness-matter framework |
Consciousness as fundamental principle operating through atomic-level awareness in causal relationships |
Experiences both as real dual-aspect phenomena where conscious awareness and atomic structure are inseparable |
|
16. Sāṅkhya |
Yes - Puruṣa as eternal conscious witness |
Pure consciousness (Puruṣa) witnessing but not participating in Prakṛti's manifestations |
Neither - pure witness consciousness doesn't experience content; redness/grayness are Prakṛti modifications witnessed but not experienced |
|
17. Buddhism |
No fundamental self/consciousness - dependent origination |
No eternal conscious source; awareness arises through dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda) |
Neither - no permanent experiencer; redness/grayness are empty constructions arising through dependent causation |
|
18. Cārvāka/Lokāyata |
No - consciousness is material brain function |
Consciousness emerges from material elements; ceases at death |
Neither - no fundamental experiencer; colors are brain-generated interpretations of material interactions |
|
19. Mīmāṃsā |
Yes - through Vedic sound principles |
Consciousness inherent in eternal Vedic sounds (śabda Brahman) governing cosmic order |
Experiences redness/grayness as sonic vibrations; all phenomena are sound-based manifestations |
|
20. Kashmiri Shaivism |
Yes - Śiva-Śakti as dynamic consciousness |
Dynamic consciousness (spanda) with creative power (śakti); consciousness (Śiva) and its power (śakti) are inseparable |
Experiences redness as vimarśa (self-awareness) in dynamic interplay; all colors are consciousness recognizing itself |
|
21. Sikhism |
Yes - Waheguru as formless conscious reality |
Formless One (Ik Onkar) with conscious presence throughout creation |
Experiences all qualities as divine manifestations; redness and grayness equally express Waheguru's consciousness |
|
22. Jainism |
Yes - through infinite conscious souls (jīvas) |
Infinite conscious souls with perfect knowledge potential; consciousness is fundamental to reality |
Perfect souls experience redness with complete clarity; bound souls experience limitations but consciousness remains fundamental |
|
23. Islam |
Yes - Allah as All-Knowing (Al-'Alīm) |
Perfect divine consciousness with complete knowledge of all creation |
Experiences redness and all phenomena perfectly as their creator; divine knowledge encompasses all qualities |
|
24. Christianity |
Yes - God as omniscient Trinity |
Perfect divine consciousness in three persons; God knows all creation intimately |
Experiences redness perfectly as creator and sustainer; divine consciousness encompasses all created qualities |
|
25. Judaism |
Yes - Hashem as All-Knowing |
One God with perfect knowledge and awareness of all creation |
Experiences redness as aspect of divine creation; God's consciousness includes perfect knowledge of all qualities |
|
26. Baháʼí |
Yes - God as unknowable essence with perfect attributes |
Transcendent God with perfect consciousness expressed through divine attributes |
Experiences redness through divine attributes while remaining essentially unknowable |
|
27. Cartesian Dualism |
Yes - God as perfect thinking substance |
God as perfect thinking substance; humans as finite thinking substances interacting with extended substance |
God experiences redness perfectly as creator; humans experience through mind-body interaction |
|
28. Idealism (Plato) |
Yes - through Forms and the Good |
Perfect eternal Forms accessed by nous (intellect); ultimate Good as source of all reality |
Experiences redness as perfect eternal Form; temporal redness is imperfect participation in ideal Redness |
|
29. Zoroastrianism |
Yes - Ahura Mazda as All-Knowing |
Wise Lord (Ahura Mazda) with perfect knowledge and good judgment |
Experiences redness as part of good creation; divine consciousness knows all qualities in their truth and goodness |
|
30. Taoism |
Yes - Tao as source consciousness |
Tao as ineffable source that gives rise to all phenomena through wu wei (non-action) |
Neither/both - Tao transcends categories yet is present in all phenomena; redness and grayness are equal expressions |
|
31. Confucianism |
Partially[ii] - Heaven (Tiān) with moral consciousness |
Heaven as conscious moral principle governing human affairs and natural order |
Experiences redness as part of harmonious natural and moral order; qualities reflect cosmic moral patterns |
|
32. Ancient Egyptian Religion |
Yes - through multiple conscious deities |
Multiple conscious deities with specialized awareness; Ra as sun consciousness, Thoth as wisdom consciousness |
Different deities experience redness differently - Ra as solar light, Isis[iii] as life-giving color, Thoth as cosmic knowledge |
|
33. Transpersonal Psychology |
Closest to DPV~ICRDAM[iv] |
Consciousness extends beyond individual ego through various transpersonal states and cosmic awareness |
Experiences redness at multiple levels - from ego-perception to cosmic consciousness where all qualities are unified |
|
34. Perennial Philosophy |
Closest to: Dual-Aspect Monism (DPV~ICRDAM) |
Essential consciousness common to all mystical traditions; universal awareness beyond cultural differences |
Experiences redness as universal quality recognized by all awakened consciousness across traditions |
|
35. Process Philosophy |
Closest to: Dual-Aspect Monism, but with some affinity for Idealism |
God experiences all actual entities; consciousness as fundamental feature of reality's basic units |
Experiences redness as actual occasions of experience; God feels all experiences including color perception |
|
36. Eco-Philosophy |
It is closest to DPV~ICRDAM, in which the source has potnetialty of consciousness. [v] |
Consciousness as property of ecological systems; Gaia as planetary consciousness |
Experiences redness as aspect of ecological awareness; colors as information in living systems |
|
37. Symbiotic Existential Cosmology |
Subjectivity (s) is potential form of consciousness; primal source (cosmos) was not fully conscious from very beginning, |
Consciousness (s) as complementary aspect of all quantum systems (physical p); subjective pole of reality; s-p interaction allowed. |
Experiences redness as subjective aspect complementing objective wavelength |
|
38. Mystical Art-Experience Framework |
Depends on the metaphysics used, but it is closet to DPV~ICRDAM, in which the source has potentiality of consciousness. |
Consciousness expressing through artistic and mystical experience |
Experiences redness as conscious manifestation in dual-aspect form; both subjective experience and objective art |
|
39. Sai Baba of Shirdi |
Yes - following Advaita principles |
Non-dual awareness (Advaita) - "there exists in all beings a sense of Being or Consciousness" |
Neither redness nor grayness - pure awareness beyond phenomenal qualities, consistent with Advaitic transcendence |
|
40. Consciousness as Ground of Reality (Deepak Chopra and Shubhas Kak) |
Yes - consciousness as fundamental field |
Universal consciousness field from which brain and matter arise as symbolic representations |
Experiences redness as manifestation within consciousness field; brain doesn't create but represents conscious experience |
Overarching Synthesized Abstract
This extensive inquiry surveys forty Vedantic and non-Vedantic philosophical frameworks to determine whether their foundational source (Brahman, Puruṣa, Allah, etc.) is fully and eternally conscious and how such a consciousness would experience sensory phenomena like redness or grayness. The analysis demonstrates that while most religious-spiritual traditions affirm some form of primordial or divine consciousness, they diverge sharply on its nature (personal/impersonal, transcendent/immanent, static/dynamic) and relation to human consciousness. Transcendental schools emphasize consciousness without content, immanent schools affirm consciousness as inclusive of all qualities, paradoxical schools reconcile unity and difference simultaneously, and evolutionary schools interpret consciousness as unfolding alongside physical processes.
The DPV~ICRDAM (Dvi-Pakṣādvaita Vedānta ~ Inseparable-Complementary-Reflective Dual-Aspect Monism) framework provides a meta-synthesis by situating Nirguṇa Brahman (NB) as neutral potentiality (S1, S7) and Saguṇa Brahman (SB) as manifested phases (S2–S6) in a Heptagonal Cyclic Cosmology (HCC). Consciousness here is neither eternally “given” nor reducible to matter but emerges reflectively in dual-aspect states where subjective (s) and non-subjective (ns) aspects are inseparable. This approach resolves contradictions between eternalism and temporal origination by distinguishing cyclic eternality from phase-specific manifestation. The study thus establishes DPV~ICRDAM as a promising paradigm for bridging ancient Vedantic insights with modern scientific cosmology and consciousness studies.
[i] Estimation of the arise of consciousness
· 3.5–4 billion years ago: First life emerged.
· ≈500 million years ago: Nervous systems evolved in multicellular organisms.
· ≈200,000–300,000 years ago: Homo sapiens appeared, with complex brains capable of self-reflective consciousness.
· In other words, Various degrees of consciousness (from minimal sentience to self-reflective awareness) arose between ~9.8 billion years after the Big Bang and ~13.7998 billion years after (today).
[ii] 1. The Partial Consciousness Problem in Confucianism: Distinguishing Ethical Governance from Metaphysical Omniscience
Moral Consciousness vs. Absolute Awareness: Why Confucian Heaven (Tiān) Represents Limited Rather Than Universal Consciousness
We marked Confucianism as "partially" conscious because Heaven (Tiān) in Confucian thought operates differently from the absolute, unlimited consciousness claimed by other frameworks. Here's why:
Limited Scope of Consciousness:
· Tiān's consciousness appears primarily focused on moral and social order rather than universal awareness
· It governs human affairs and natural harmony but isn't portrayed as omniscient about all reality
· Unlike Brahman, Allah, or other absolute sources, Tiān's awareness seems functionally constrained to ethical and cosmic governance
Moral Rather Than Ontological Priority:
· Tiān is more of a conscious moral principle than a fundamental metaphysical ground
· Its "knowledge" centers on what promotes harmony and virtue, not comprehensive reality awareness
· This differs from frameworks claiming their source knows all phenomena equally
Impersonal Yet Limited:
· While Tiān transcends individual human consciousness, it doesn't claim the unlimited scope of awareness found in Vedantic or theistic systems
· It's more like a cosmic ethical intelligence than absolute consciousness
Historical Development:
· Classical Confucianism focused on social ethics rather than metaphysical speculation about ultimate reality
· Later Neo-Confucian developments added more absolute consciousness claims, but the core tradition remains more modest
However, we should note this classification is somewhat interpretive. Some scholars might argue Tiān represents fuller consciousness, while others might question whether it's conscious at all versus being an impersonal moral principle. The "partial" designation reflects Confucianism's focus on practical moral governance rather than claims about unlimited cosmic awareness.
This categorization could be debated - what's your view on how Confucian Heaven should be classified regarding consciousness?
[iii] Isis refers to the ancient Egyptian goddess, not the modern terrorist organization.
Isis in Ancient Egyptian Religion:
Isis was one of the most important deities in the Egyptian pantheon, typically depicted as:
- Goddess of magic, motherhood, and healing
- Wife of Osiris and mother of Horus
- Associated with life-giving powers and resurrection
- Often shown with outstretched wings, offering protection
In your document's entry for Ancient Egyptian Religion (#32), Isis is mentioned alongside other Egyptian deities like Ra (sun god) and Thoth (wisdom god) as examples of conscious deities who would experience phenomena like redness differently according to their specialized domains.
The document suggests Isis would experience "redness as life-giving color" - connecting the sensory experience to her role as a goddess of life, fertility, and nurturing power.
This fits the broader analysis of how different frameworks conceptualize whether their fundamental conscious sources (gods, cosmic principles, etc.) would experience sensory phenomena like colors, and in what manner that experience would occur based on their particular nature and attributes.
[iv]
1. Metaphysical Convergence: How Transpersonal Psychology, Perennial Philosophy, and Process Philosophy Align with Dual-Aspect Monism
Beyond Traditional Metaphysics: DPV~ICRDAM as a Unifying Framework for Transpersonal, Perennial, and Process Philosophies
Our analysis of which fundamental metaphysics each most closely aligns with:
1. Transpersonal Psychology
Closest to: Dual-Aspect Monism (specifically DPV~ICRDAM)
Transpersonal psychology explores states of consciousness beyond the individual ego, including mystical experiences, spiritual development, and expanded awareness. This aligns strongly with DPV~ICRDAM's framework because:
- It recognizes both ordinary individual consciousness (CSEs in DA_ADS_SB) and expanded transpersonal states that could correspond to awareness of the neutral NB ground
- The cyclic nature of consciousness transformation in DPV~ICRDAM matches transpersonal psychology's emphasis on developmental stages and state transitions
- Both frameworks integrate spiritual/contemplative methodologies with systematic observation
- The dual-aspect approach accommodates both subjective spiritual experiences and their neurophysical correlates
2. Perennial Philosophy
Closest to: Dual-Aspect Monism (DPV~ICRDAM)
Perennial philosophy posits that all major spiritual traditions point toward the same ultimate reality. This maps well onto DPV~ICRDAM:
- The neutral NB corresponds to the "unmanifested absolute" found across traditions
- The manifested SB reflects the diverse expressions of this ultimate reality in different cultural contexts
- The equivalence hypothesis (spirituality-based DPV ~ science-based ICRDAM) exemplifies perennial philosophy's claim that different approaches converge on the same truth
- The contemplative methodology bridges mystical insight with empirical observation
3. Process Philosophy
Closest to: Dual-Aspect Monism, but with some affinity for Idealism
Process philosophy (Whitehead, etc.) views reality as composed of processes and events rather than static substances. While it has some idealist tendencies (emphasizing experience as fundamental), it aligns most closely with dual-aspect monism:
- The dynamic, cyclical transformations in DPV~ICRDAM (NB ↔ SB phases) match process philosophy's emphasis on temporal becoming
- Both reject substance dualism in favor of relational, processual ontology
- The inseparable complementarity of subjective and physical aspects resonates with process philosophy's "actual occasions" that have both mental and physical poles
- However, process philosophy's panexperientialist leanings give it some idealist characteristics
4. Critical Assessment
While I see these alignments, I should note that each of these philosophical movements contains internal diversity. Some transpersonal psychologists might lean more toward idealism, some process philosophers toward materialism, and perennial philosophy interpretations vary considerably.
The strength of DPV~ICRDAM in relation to these frameworks lies in its explicit attempt to bridge contemplative insight with empirical methodology, though the empirical validation of some claims (like consciousness arising during the BB to pre-Planck epoch transition) remains speculative and would require substantial evidence to support scientifically.
[v] 3. Eco-Philosophy and Dual-Aspect Monism: Bridging Environmental Ethics and Consciousness Studies through Integrated Metaphysics
Beyond Dualism in Environmental Thought: How Eco-Philosophy Converges with DPV~ICRDAM's Unified Framework
Q. There are 4 fundamental metaphysics: Idealism, materialism, dualism , and dual-aspect monism (such as DPV~ICRDAM (spirituality-based Dvi-Pakṣādvaita Vedānta ~ (equivalent to) science-based Inseparable-Complementary-Reflective Dual-Aspect Monism: see uploaded file). Which metaphysics is closest to Eco-philosophy?
Based on the eco-philosophy document and the DPV~ICRDAM framework you've provided, eco-philosophy appears most closely aligned with dual-aspect monism, particularly the type exemplified by your DPV~ICRDAM model. Here's my analysis:
1. Why Eco-Philosophy Aligns with Dual-Aspect Monism
1. Fundamental Interconnectedness
Eco-philosophy's core principle of the "interconnectedness of all life" mirrors the dual-aspect monist view that subjective and objective aspects are inseparable and complementary. Both reject strict subject-object dualism in favor of relational, process-oriented understanding.
2. Systems Thinking and Holistic Integration
The eco-philosophical emphasis on systems thinking (particularly through Capra's work) parallels dual-aspect monism's integration of mental and physical aspects within unified entities. Both see reality as consisting of dynamic, interconnected processes rather than separate substances.
3. Rejection of Pure Materialism
Eco-philosophy's incorporation of phenomenological approaches and embodied experience (via thinkers like Abram and Merleau-Ponty) suggests consciousness and experiential qualities are fundamental rather than merely emergent from matter alone.
4. Beyond Traditional Dualisms
Eco-philosophy explicitly challenges dualistic thinking (mind/body, culture/nature, human/non-human) in favor of more integrative approaches, which aligns with dual-aspect monism's rejection of substance dualism.
2. Specific Parallels with DPV~ICRDAM
Your DPV~ICRDAM framework shows particularly strong resonance with eco-philosophy:
- Neutral ground source (NB~preBB_QVF) parallels eco-philosophy's vision of an underlying creative process of nature
- Dual-aspect manifested reality (SB~DA_PPU) reflects eco-philosophy's recognition that all entities have both subjective and objective dimensions
- Dynamic emergence and return mirrors eco-philosophy's process-oriented understanding of natural cycles
3. Why Not the Other Metaphysics?
- Idealism: Too mentalistic; eco-philosophy takes the physical world seriously
- Materialism: Too reductionist; fails to account for eco-philosophy's emphasis on consciousness and experience
- Dualism: Creates the very separations eco-philosophy seeks to overcome
4. Critical Assessment
However, we should note that eco-philosophy as a field contains diverse perspectives, and not all eco-philosophers would necessarily embrace dual-aspect monism explicitly. Some might lean toward more materialist approaches (especially those focused on environmental justice), while others might favor more idealist interpretations (particularly those influenced by certain indigenous traditions).
The alignment we are identifying is strongest with the phenomenological and systems-thinking strands of eco-philosophy, which do seem to converge on something resembling dual-aspect monism even if they don't use that terminology explicitly.
-------------------------------------------------- --------
RāmLakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
<rlpvimal@yahoo.co.in>-------------------------------------------------- --------
RāmLakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
<rlpvimal@yahoo.co.in>3. Protoconsciousness to Reflective Minds: 100 Stages of Conscious Experience in Light of DPV~ICRDAM
We will do both: (A) a master timeline table broken into many empirically grounded micro-stages (compressed where helpful), and (B) a synthesizing article that (i) explains the clusters, (ii) maps them to your DPV~ICRDAM notions (NB, SB, DAS, s/ns, ADS/PIS), and (iii) supplies 10 concrete examples per major cluster (so you get 10 × 10 = 100 concrete examples across the whole panorama). This keeps the staging scientifically grounded while still giving the wide, example-rich coverage you asked for.
We used contemporary, authoritative sources for the load-bearing scientific claims (e.g., Archibald on eukaryogenesis; Kump on oxygenation; Brunet & King on the origin of animal multicellularity; Oizumi/Albantakis/Tononi on IIT; and general Earth history syntheses by Hazen). Where I make empirical timing claims I cite those sources (last name, year). The most important factual anchors are cited inline.
PART A — Master timeline (micro-stages) — 30 micro-stages grouped into 10 major clusters
Note: the micro-stages give a fine-grained progression (30 rows). Each major cluster (Ⅰ → Ⅹ) is then expanded with 10 concrete examples in Part B.
|
ID |
Approx. date |
Micro-stage name |
Key process / hallmark |
||
|
Ⅰ-1 |
4.5–4.0 Ga (bya) |
Planet formation & prebiotic chemistry |
Planet formation; delivery/synthesis of organics (Hazen, 2012). (Amazon) |
||
|
Ⅰ-2 |
4.0–3.8 Ga |
Late heavy bombardment & protocells |
Formation of protocell compartments and autocatalytic cycles. (Amazon) |
||
|
Ⅰ-3 |
3.8–3.5 Ga |
Abiogenesis onset |
First robust metabolic networks; earliest stromatolites. (Amazon) |
||
|
Ⅱ-1 |
3.5–2.5 Ga |
Diverse prokaryote ecosystems |
Prokaryotic radiation, metabolic diversity (photosynthesis/chemoautotrophy). |
||
|
Ⅱ-2 |
~2.45 Ga |
Great Oxidation Event (GOE) |
Atmospheric O₂ rise begins—new energy regimes (Kump, 2008). (Penn State) |
||
|
Ⅱ-3 |
2.4–2.0 Ga |
Bacterial innovation & ecological restructuring |
New redox niches; more complex microbial interactions. |
||
|
III-1 |
~2.1–1.6 Ga |
Eukaryogenesis (endosymbiosis) |
Mitochondrial origin, compartmentalization — energy & info capacity rises (Archibald, 2015). (PubMed) |
||
|
III-2 |
1.9–1.5 Ga |
Diversifying eukaryotes |
Protist diversification; early sexual/parasexual processes. |
||
|
III-3 |
1.6–1.2 Ga |
Complex single-cell behaviours |
Larger protists, intracellular signaling complexity. |
||
|
IV-1 |
1.2–0.9 Ga |
Emergent simple multicellularity |
Colonial forms, beginnings of division of labor. (Brunet & King, 2017). (PubMed) |
||
|
IV-2 |
0.9–0.6 Ga |
Neoproterozoic dynamics & NOE |
Neoproterozoic Oxygenation Event — ecological reorganization (Och, 2012; Kump, 2008). (ScienceDirect, Penn State) |
||
|
V-1 |
0.63–0.54 Ga |
Ediacaran macroscopic life |
Large multicellular lifeforms and tissue complexity. (ScienceDirect) |
||
|
V-2 |
0.54–0.50 Ga |
Cambrian explosion (nervous systems) |
Rapid animal diversification; first centralized neural architectures. (PubMed) |
||
|
VI-1 |
0.50–0.25 Ga |
Diversification of bilaterians / complex nervous systems |
Arthropods, molluscs, early chordates — richer sensorimotor systems. (PubMed) |
||
|
VI-2 |
0.25–0.06 Ga |
Vertebrate/cephalopod sophistication |
Mammal/cephalopod lineages with complex cognition capacities. |
||
|
VII-1 |
0.06–0.02 Ga |
Primate evolution & social cognition |
Brain expansion, social complexity, proto-self representations. |
||
|
VII-2 |
0.3–0.2 Ma |
Emergence of Homo sapiens anatomically |
Human brain structures with potential for advanced CSE. (BookBrowse.com) |
||
|
VIII-1 |
200–50 ka |
Behavioral modernity (symbolic culture) |
Art, burial, language scaffolding rich CSEs. |
||
|
VIII-2 |
50–12 ka |
Upper Paleolithic elaboration |
Complex ritual, art, long-term planning — reflective consciousness consolidates. |
||
|
IX-1 |
12–6 ka |
Neolithic & early symbolic systems |
Agriculture, villages, early writing preconditions — external scaffolding for CSE. |
||
|
IX-2 |
6 ka – 2 ka |
Early civilizations & literacy |
Widespread symbolic systems, formal thought institutions. |
||
|
X-1 |
2 ka – 0.2 ka |
Scientific, religious, and philosophical reflection |
Theories of mind, introspection, expanded meta-consciousness. |
||
|
X-2 |
0.2 ka – present |
Industrial & information age (externalized cognition) |
Technology, mass culture, and cognitive extension (writing → nets). |
||
How to read this: the micro-stages are chronological markers that reflect biological, ecological, geochemical, and cultural innovations that increased (a) the energy and integration capacity of living systems, and (b) the scaffolding and expression of conscious subjective experiences (CSEs). The next Part B expands each of the 10 major clusters (I → X) with narrative synthesis and 10 concrete examples per cluster.
PART B — Article: Evolution of Consciousness (synthesis + 10 examples per major cluster)
Title: From Protoconsciousness to Reflective Minds: A multi-scale, evidence-based synthesis of the evolution of conscious subjective experience
Abstract (one line): Conscious subjective experience (CSE) plausibly emerged through a long continuum of increasing integration, energy throughput, signaling complexity, and cultural scaffolding; here we map that continuum into ten empirically grounded clusters and provide 100 concrete examples connecting mechanism to phenomenology in the DPV~ICRDAM frame.
Intro: Definitions and framework
- Consciousness (DPV~ICRDAM definition): Individual consciousness (IC) = conscious subjective experiences (CSEs) of ADS and PIS, exogenous/endogenous stimuli, and conscious cognitive components, always the subjective (s) aspect inseparable from its non-subjective (ns) neural/physical basis (NPA/NPB). IC is a late evolutionary development in this account (user summary).
- Approach used here: map empirically dated innovations (cells, oxygenation, eukaryogenesis, multicellularity, nervous systems, cultural technologies) to likely increases in effective integrated information (EII) and thus to progressively richer CSE capacity (IIT as theoretical anchor) (Oizumi et al., 2014). (PMC)
The five most load-bearing scientific anchors used below:
1. Eukaryogenesis (~2.1–1.6 Ga) — mitochondria & compartmentalization increase energy and integrative capacity. (Archibald, 2015). (PubMed)
2. Great Oxidation & later Neoproterozoic oxygenation — oxygen pulses enabled larger bodies and high-energy nervous processing (Kump, 2008; Och, 2012). (Penn State, ScienceDirect)
3. Origins of animal multicellularity and cell differentiation — groundwork for nervous tissues (Brunet & King, 2017). (PubMed)
4. Integrated Information Theory (IIT) — formal link between integrated causal structure and conscious experience (Oizumi et al., 2014). (PMC)
5. Human emergence and behavioral modernity — neurological and cultural capacities enabling modern reflective consciousness (Smithsonian human origins). (BookBrowse.com)
Cluster I — Planetary formation → abiogenesis (4.5–3.5 Ga)
Synthesis: Prebiotic chemistry and the first protocells established the minimal physical organization for persistent, stateful information processing. These may be called molecular-level protoconscious-like systems in the broad DPV~ICRDAM sense (very rudimentary PC), because they instantiate integrated causal patterns (EII minimal). (Hazen, 2012). (Amazon)
10 concrete examples (Cluster I):
1. Autocatalytic metabolic cycles (formose, reductive citric acid variants).
2. Lipid vesicles / protocell membranes forming compartments.
3. Ribozymes showing catalysis + information.
4. Prebiotic redox gradients (mineral surfaces) enabling energy flows.
5. Early RNA/peptide interactions forming primitive information networks.
6. Stromatolite mat formation (microbial community structuring).
7. Photon-driven chemistry (UV gradients near surface).
8. Mineral-catalyzed polymerization (clays, metal sulfides).
9. Local microenvironments (hydrothermal vents) offering sustained gradients.
10. Primitive oscillatory chemistry (temporal structuring enabling proto-memory).
DPV~ICRDAM note: these systems instantiate proto-DAS (very small EII), s-aspect correspondingly minimal/proto (PC), ns-aspect = chemistry/thermodynamics.
Cluster II — Prokaryotic ecosystems & the oxygen transition (3.5–2.0 Ga)
Synthesis: Prokaryote diversification built complex ecological signaling (quorum sensing, biofilms) and, via oxygenic photosynthesis, a new energy economy culminating (eventually) in the GOE — opening long-term potential for higher integration (Kump, 2008). (Penn State)
10 concrete examples (Cluster II):
1. Cyanobacteria and oxygenic photosynthesis.
2. Biofilm multicellularity and division of labor in microbial mats.
3. Quorum sensing circuits coordinating group behavior.
4. Redox-sensitive regulatory networks.
5. Horizontal gene transfer boosting innovation.
6. Magnetotactic bacteria (sensory structuring).
7. Chemotactic behaviors in bacteria (navigation).
8. Sulfate-respiring communities (metabolic complexity).
9. Microbial syntrophy (metabolic interdependence).
10. Stromatolite ecosystems as habitat-level integrators.
DPV~ICRDAM note: larger, structured communities raise local EII via coupled interactions — still protoconscious at most.
Cluster III — Eukaryogenesis & complex single cells (≈2.1–1.2 Ga)
Synthesis: The endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and the rise of cellular compartmentalization markedly increased per-cell energy budgets and internal signaling complexity — a plausible turning point for more sustained, higher-bandwidth protocognitive dynamics (Archibald, 2015). (PubMed)
10 concrete examples (Cluster III):
1. Early mitochondrion-harboring protists (host–symbiont systems).
2. Cytoskeletal elaboration (actin, tubulin networks).
3. Nuclear membrane and regulated transcription compartments.
4. Intracellular vesicle transport and complex endomembrane trafficking.
5. Sexual processes (meiosis/mitosis innovations).
6. Signal transduction cascades (kinases, second messengers).
7. Larger unicellular predators with complex behaviors (e.g., some amoebae).
8. Photoreceptor proteins (opsins) in protists.
9. Metabolic coupling between organelles (energy/ion gradients).
10. Early eukaryotic signaling domains prefiguring adhesion molecules.
DPV~ICRDAM note: Eukaryotic cell complexity increases per-unit EII: intracellular s/ns patterning becomes richer (stronger PC).
Cluster IV — Simple multicellularity → tissue precursors (1.2–0.6 Ga)
Synthesis: Repeated independent origins of multicellularity enabled spatially distributed integration and functional specialization (Brunet & King, 2017). These body-level architectures provide the scaffolding for later nervous systems. (PubMed)
10 concrete examples (Cluster IV):
1. Colonial choanoflagellates (aggregation + division of labor).
2. Early ECM components (collagens/adhesins) for tissue integrity.
3. Cell–cell communication peptides (paracrine signaling).
4. Simple epithelial tissues enabling coordinated response.
5. Primitive contractile cells (mesenchyme precursors).
6. Phototactic multicellular mats (light-direction behavior).
7. Sponges (Porifera) as integrated multicellular networks.
8. Early patterning genes (Hox/selector homologs) used for body plans.
9. Extracellular signal-regulated kinases and morphogen gradients.
10. Proto-immune cell interactions (allorecognition).
DPV~ICRDAM note: distributed multicellularity increases system-level EII; proto-subjective states can be embodied in multicellular wholes (rudimentary organismal PC).
Cluster V — Ediacaran & Cambrian animalization (0.63–0.5 Ga)
Synthesis: The Neoproterozoic oxygen pulses and ecological drivers produced macroscopic animals with coordinated physiology and the first dedicated neural tissues — the likely first substrates for minimal animal consciousness. (Kump, 2008; Brunet & King, 2017). (Penn State, PubMed)
10 concrete examples (Cluster V):
1. Ediacaran rangeomorphs and Dickinsonia — integrated physiology. (ScienceDirect)
2. Cnidarian nerve nets (diffuse neural architectures).
3. Ctenophore conduction systems (early neural-like signaling).
4. Bilaterian centralized nerve cords (primitive brains).
5. Sensory receptor diversification (mechanoreceptors, chemoreceptors).
6. Sensorimotor loops enabling locomotion responses.
7. Synapse-like molecular toolkits (neuropeptides, ionotropic receptors).
8. Predator–prey coevolution increasing behavioral complexity.
9. Gastrulation and organized tissue layering (functional integration).
10. Coordinated rhythmic behaviors (swimming, burrowing).
DPV~ICRDAM note: these animals instantiate organism-level DAS with increased EII — likely to support primary CSE (affective, perceptual states).
Cluster VI — Cambrian → Mesozoic sophistication of nervous systems (0.5–0.06 Ga)
Synthesis: Diversification among arthropods, mollusks (notably cephalopods), and chordates produced multiple independent solutions for complex sensorimotor integration and cognition. (PubMed)
10 concrete examples (Cluster VI):
1. Arthropod compound eyes and sophisticated sensorimotor loops.
2. Cephalopods (octopus) with distributed neural integration & problem solving.
3. Early vertebrate brain regionalization (telencephalon, midbrain).
4. Evolution of synaptic plasticity mechanisms (LTP/LTD precursors).
5. Multimodal sensory integration (vision + olfaction + mechanosensation).
6. Central pattern generators for complex behavior.
7. Social insect colonies with emergent coordination (hive mind parallels).
8. Complex predation tactics (ambush, tool use in some lineages).
9. Development of affect-like modulatory neurochemistry (monoamines).
10. Increased behavioral flexibility (learning, memory).
DPV~ICRDAM note: increasing specialized networks and recurrent loops raise organismal EII and hence the plausibility of richer CSE-like experiences.
Cluster VII — Mammals, primates & self-models (0.06–0.002 Ma)
Synthesis: Mammalian limbic systems and primate cortical expansions yield more structured self-models (ADS) and more stable autobiographical memory (PIS) — steps toward the modern human self as described in DPV~ICRDAM. (BookBrowse.com)
10 concrete examples (Cluster VII):
1. Limbic affective circuits (amygdala, hypothalamus) supporting valenced experience.
2. Hippocampal episodic memory systems (autobiographical scaffolding).
3. Prefrontal cortex enabling working memory and planning.
4. Mirror neuron networks and proto-theory-of-mind.
5. Mother–infant attachment systems shaping social cognition.
6. Vocal learning in some mammals (e.g., primates; later hominins).
7. Tool-related executive functions in great apes.
8. Social learning and cultural transmission in primates.
9. Complex play behaviors tied to cognitive development.
10. Self-recognition phenomena (mirror tests in some species).
DPV~ICRDAM note: these components instantiate ADS (active dynamic self) and nascent PIS patterns (autobiographical LTM), both crucial for IC (individual consciousness) as you defined.
Cluster VIII — Homo sapiens behavioral modernity (200–12 ka)
Synthesis: The combination of advanced brain architecture and cumulative culture enabled symbolic thought, narrative self, and richly differentiated CSE contents (language, art, ritual). (BookBrowse.com)
10 concrete examples (Cluster VIII):
1. Complex spoken language (syntax & semantics).
2. Cave paintings and representational art.
3. Ritual burial and symbolic practice.
4. Long-range planning and cooperative hunting.
5. Extended theory of mind and mental time travel.
6. Narrative construction (myth, stories).
7. Music and dance as collective altered-consciousness rituals.
8. External tools scaffolding cognition (composite tools).
9. Social norms and moral cognition.
10. Shamans/altered states as culturally regulated CSEs.
DPV~ICRDAM note: culture acts as external SB-level scaffolding that expands and stabilizes DAS contents.
Cluster IX — Agricultural & civilizational extension (12 ka – 2 ka)
Synthesis: Literacy, institutions, and social structures externalize memory (external Ns resources) and generate new cultural forms of CSE. Writing gives persistent representations supporting reflective self-concepts (PIS reinforcement).
10 concrete examples (Cluster IX):
1. Cuneiform/early writing systems storing collective memory.
2. Calendars and ritualized time structuring of experience.
3. Organized religions with shared metaphysical frameworks.
4. Bureaucratic institutions shaping collective attention.
5. Philosophy and ethical reflection (explicit meta-CSE).
6. Monumental art and long-term symbolic anchors.
7. Trade networks as cognitive niches.
8. Educational institutions formalizing introspective skills.
9. Codified law shaping social cognition.
10. Technological chains of external memory (accounting, maps).
DPV~ICRDAM note: SB (manifested cultural structures) massively extend the possible EII substrate for human DAS.
Cluster X — Science, industry, and the information age (2 ka – present)
Synthesis: Scientific method, printing, computing, and the internet vastly amplify distributed cognition and create new forms of shared CSE (collective attention, mediated attention, digital immersion). The architecture of human CSEs is now both neural and techno-social.
10 concrete examples (Cluster X):
1. Printing press ⇒ mass distribution of symbolic content.
2. Scientific instrumentation revealing brain correlates (neuroimaging).
3. Industrial urban life reshaping attentional niches.
4. Writing + computers + internet = externalized, searchable memory.
5. Virtual/augmented reality producing novel immersive CSEs.
6. Global media shaping shared affective states.
7. Neuroscience mapping precise NPA correlates of CSE (EEG/fMRI).
8. Psychopharmacology altering valenced subjective experiences.
9. AI systems mediating human cognition (collaborative hybrid minds).
10. Cultural accelerants (social media, streaming) changing lived phenomenal structures.
DPV~ICRDAM closing note: At this stage, conscious DAS are hybrid human–culture systems: s-aspect experience remains private but is continually co-shaped by extensive ns-aspect artifacts; NB (the neutral unmanifested source in DPV) remains presupposed as the ultimate ground, SB are these richly manifested DAS ensembles.
Discussion: mapping DPV~ICRDAM concepts onto the evolutionary map
- NB (Nirguṇa Brahman, neutral source) in DPV~ICRDAM corresponds functionally to the unmanifest potential that allows emergence of DAS at many scales. In naturalistic/scientific framing it plays the role of ultimate ontological ground (not empirically observable), while SB = the manifold of manifested dual-aspect states (cells, organisms, societies).
- DAS (dual-aspect state): at each scale we located candidate DAS (molecular cycles, cells, multicellular organisms, brains, cultural institutions) — each has an s-aspect plausibly qualifying as PC/C depending on integration and complexity, and an ns-aspect we can measure (physiology, NPA).
- ADS vs PIS: ADS (active dynamic self) and PIS (passive invariant self) appear late (Clusters VII–VIII onward) as neurocognitive mechanisms for selfhood and autobiographical continuity become robust. Before that, there may be organismal “proto-ADS” (mobilized action selection) but not durable PIS.
Testable predictions and empirical programs
1. Comparative EII estimation: attempt to measure φ-like integration proxies across taxa (single cells → sponges → cnidarians → arthropods → cephalopods → vertebrates) and test correlation with behavioral indicators of valenced experience. (Oizumi et al., 2014). (PMC)
2. Genomic / proteomic markers: identify conserved synaptic toolkits and signaling molecules whose appearance precedes clear behavioral complexity (Brunet & King; Archibald). (PubMed)
3. Paleo-ecological coupling: examine oxygenation proxies and bursts of morphological/behavioral complexity (Kump, 2008). (Penn State)
4. Cross-cultural consciousness archaeology: map when cultural technologies (writing, ritual) produce changes in group-level CSE signatures.
Short conclusion
- Conscious subjective experience likely arose via a multifaceted, multi-scale process: from molecular autocatalysis through eukaryotic complexity and multicellularity to nervous systems and finally to socio-cultural scaffolding. The DPV~ICRDAM framework maps cleanly onto this story by treating consciousness as the s-aspect of DAS at progressively higher integration scales; ADS and PIS appear late as durable selfhood. The timeline above is evidence-anchored and expandable into finer micro-stages on demand.
References (select, cited in text; last name, year)
Archibald, J. (2015). Endosymbiosis and Eukaryotic Cell Evolution. Current Biology. (PubMed)
Brunet, T., & King, N. (2017). The origin of animal multicellularity and cell differentiation. Developmental Cell. (PubMed)
Hazen, R. M. (2012). The Story of Earth: The First 4.5 Billion Years, from Stardust to Living Planet. Viking. (Amazon)
Kump, L. R. (2008). The rise of atmospheric oxygen. Nature. (Penn State)
Oizumi, M., Albantakis, L., & Tononi, G. (2014). From the Phenomenology to the Mechanisms of Consciousness: Integrated Information Theory 3.0. PLoS Comput Biol. (PMC)
Och, L. M., & others (2012). Neoproterozoic Oxygenation Event (NOE) (review). (ScienceDirect)
Smithsonian Institution, Human Origins Program (overview material on Homo sapiens emergence). (BookBrowse.com)
-------------------------------------------------- --------
RāmLakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Thank you, Chris, for "the emergence of consciousness arose around 2 billion year ago". Can you define consciousness 2bya? Is it like ours, or is it entity-related protoconsciousness?
Regards,RamOn Sunday, September 7, 2025 at 8:14:10 PM UTC-4 dhushara wrote:Dear Ram,Thanks for your summary of the "Consciousness Primacy Claim”.Your “overarching commentary is inaccurate in two key respects.1. Transpersonal, perennial and eco philosophies are not closest to dual aspect monism or your hybrid ICDAM-DVP. This critique applies even more so to all the idealistic Vedantic approaches you are listing as well, where your framework is not the conclusive remedy, because SEC admits mental causation consistent with Vedantic idealism and thus becomes key to the "Consciousness Primacy Claim”.Symbiotic Existential Cosmology is interactive complementary aspect monism, which has just as much affinity with all these as dual aspect for the following reason. It is neither impure, nor dualism any more than dual aspect monism is dualism, so your overarching claims are not valid.The wave and particle aspects of quantum reality are not dual aspect, but operate through the interactive complementarity expressed in the special relativistic wave equation in von Neumann process 2 and von Neumann process 1, the projection operator onto eigenvalues violating classical causality. The wave extends into both the past and future and the collapse is a “decision-making process” that displays interaction of the extended wave function in space time with particle creation and annihilation.This deep analogy with the mind-body problem makes it impossible to validly claim the double world knot of subjective consciousness and mental causation is just a dual aspect to physical causality, because quantum complementarity is a central example of interactive complementarity, without which the quantum universe could not exist.2. Your emergence summary is critically incomplete:
[i] Estimation of the arise of consciousness
· 3.5–4 billion years ago: First life emerged.
· ≈500 million years ago: Nervous systems evolved in multicellular organisms.
· ≈200,000–300,000 years ago: Homo sapiens appeared, with complex brains capable of self-reflective consciousness.
Symbiotic Cosmology asserts that the emergence of consciousness arose around 2 billion year ago with the eucaryote endosymbiosis when the cell membrane became freed from energy production to enable quantum sentience due to excitability at the edge of chaos. This is the second most important emergence following biogenesis and is the bottle neck attributed to the rare earth hypothesis that says conscious complex organisms are cosmological rare in relations to prokaryote level organisms.Chris KingOn 8/09/2025, at 7:36 AM, Paul Werbos <paul....@gmail.com> wrote:This is an important debate (important because so many humans get.. into some mental state over it):"Is it possible that all that exists is just emergent behavior of pure consciousness beyond any possible laws of physics?"My main objection to that viewpoint is that it is utterly fuzzy and meaningless, becausethe answer would depend on the definition chosen for the word "consciousness", and there are MANY serious definitions of that noise in English. In my view, the first international conference on consciousness showed a lot more depth on such basic issues than more recent conferences; my own plenary there (https://arxiv.org/abs/q-bio/0311006) was one of many by people who remembered how important the 1pp experience of reading a dictionary is when using English words on such issues!YES, everything we say seems to be the emergent property of a system which meetsSOME very proper definitions of "consciousness"but the universe might be what many people do not have in mind. And of course, none of us humans truly KNOWS; still, this possibility works and is the only one we have now which meets Occam's Razor, a very fundamental principle in consciousness.
----
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Scientific Basis of Consciousness Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sboc-forum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sboc-forum/268628419.394237.1757179941058%40mail.yahoo.com.
--You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Biological Physics and Meaning" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Biological-Physics-an...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Biological-Physics-and-Meaning/CACLqmgfAKw2eu9jUGfPv0-149Q1c8FfUSy6vHD5tkM2_XZaDbw%40mail.gmail.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Scientific Basis of Consciousness Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sboc-forum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sboc-forum/7cf8a488-c10c-44f2-9163-034ca4993b18n%40googlegroups.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Scientific Basis of Consciousness Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sboc-forum/k35-e42ozYc/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to sboc-forum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sboc-forum/CACLqmgdQo0BFj5-RJpsWb7nTC9utkO0F5O_0bM6zyR6S31dXVw%40mail.gmail.com.