Could a rock have consciousness? Good answer from someone on Quora:

"    Yes, obviously.

    Why obviously?

    Well, first of all, where is the “disconnect” and what is it made
of? Specifically, the disconnect that must occur if some parts of
reality are “conscious” while others aren’t. And don’t get me started
on the nonsense superstition of “emergent properties” — show me one
“emergent property” that is independent of the conscious observer
coming to the conclusion it is emergent.

    Secondly, as physicists are now starting to realize (or realise if
you’re English/Australian):

    Let’s start with Prof. Freeman Dyson:

    “Quantum mechanics makes matter even in the smallest pieces into
    active agent, and I think that is something very fundamental.
    particle in the universe is an active agent making choices between
    random processes.”2

    “…consciousness is not just a passive epiphenomenon carried along
by the chemical events in our brains, but is an active agent forcing
the molecular complexes to make choices between one quantum state and
another. In
    other words, mind is already inherent in every electron.”3

    Physicist Sir Arthur Eddington

    “Physics is the study of the structure of consciousness. The
“stuff” of the world is mindstuff.”


    “It is difficult for the matter-of-fact physicist to accept the
view that the substratum of everything is of mental character.”

    Physicist Prof. Richard Conn Henry

    “In what is known as a “Renninger type experiment,” the wave
function is collapsed simply by a human mind seeing nothing. No
irreversible act of amplification involving the photon has taken place—
yet the decision is irreversibly made. The universe is entirely

    Prof. Amit Goswami

        “we have a new integrative paradigm of science, based not on
the primacy of matter as the old science, but on the primacy of
consciousness. Consciousness is the ground of all being…”1

    Then of course, we have been reminded by sages throughout history
of this basic element:

    All phenomena are projections in the mind.
    —The Third Karmapa

    Matter is derived from mind, not mind from matter.
    —The Tibetan Book of the Great Liberation

    The list goes on."

On this, I think Bruno, Stephen, and I agree. Where I disagree with
comp is that I see the stuff of the mind as not just numberstuff, but
sense. Not only no stuff at all, but the antithesis of stuff. Not
emptiness (the lack of stuff), but the insoluble solvent of stuffness
itself. Where arithmetic is represented as methodical encoding, sense
guesses and makes it up as it goes along.

It seems enigmatic and mysterious because it is a thesis which is
blind to itself except through its reflected antithesis, which is not
mysterious or enigmatic but public and declarative. This does not mean
that we can't understand what it is and communicate effectively about
that understanding.

We can use the symmetry as a mirror to reflect light into the dark of
our blind thesis. Both comp and materialism ignore the symmetry and
assume that subjectivity is part of a material or an arithmetic
thesis, which leads to the Explanatory Gap, Hard Problem, and Symbol
Grounding problem.  Instead, if we focus on the symmetry itself we can
infer the qualities of the Hard Solution, which is of course,
inference and symmetry themselves. This is what sense is all about.
Connecting the dots. Taking a leap of faith. Bridging the gap. It is
not a wild ass guess, but a puzzle to be solved, an itch to be
scratched, a need to be filled.

How I think it works is through a multisense realism. Inferences
accumulate a figurative history which is retained in the now. What we
learn is stored literally in our ongoing perception. These living
histories or channels of sense are woven together as worlds or
perceptual inertial frames. The trick is that weaving such a world
elevates the subjective perception above what they have woven, so that
they can see through the motives of worlds beneath them while the
subject becomes invisible or opaque to the less significant subjects.
What it looks like to the elevated subject is determinism. Knowledge
and power.

By seizing or appropriating this power over lesser worlds, the subject
disenchants her antithesis and amplifies her own - in the form of
increasingly effective motive force. The power to see through things
brings a power to see things through. Decisiveness, strategic
foresight, intelligence. Transparency informs the eye, the aye, and
the I to progress its own preferences and willfulness. It takes the
reigns and questions what used to be a simple public fact ('man cannot
fly') and turns it into private ideas ('seems like maybe man can fly
with a propeller and wings') until eventually one of those ideas lead
to other ideas that ultimately transform a private history of thought
into new public fact. Using knowledge for power is what technology is.

Yes Doctor is a great way to remember how this works. The idea of
betting on something important (pulling the trigger on something you
have 'designs on') is what sense and motive is all about. Signs and
designs are the thesis, current and power are the 3p antithesis when
we see the signs and designs of less significant worlds from a

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to