The basic definition of consciousness…”characterized by the experience of perceptions, thoughts, feelings, awareness of the external world, and…self-awareness,” according to the Oxford Dictionary of Psychology.
How does science explain this?
Scientists simply don’t…know where it comes from, or what it’s made of…
we can’t exhaustively say other organisms, and even inanimate objects, don’t have consciousness. Humans relate to animals and can imagine, say, dogs and cats have some amount of consciousness because we see their facial expressions and how they appear to make decisions. But just because we don’t “relate to” rocks, the ocean, or the night sky, that isn’t the same as proving those things don’t have consciousness.
This is where a philosophical stance called panpsychism comes into play…
“This claims consciousness is inherent in even the tiniest pieces of matter — an idea that suggests the fundamental building blocks of reality have conscious experience. Crucially, it implies consciousness could be found throughout the universe…”
One of the leading minds in physics, 2020 Nobel laureate and black hole pioneer Roger Penrose, has written extensively about quantum mechanics as a suspected vehicle of consciousness.
The Science of Consciousness (‘TSC’) is an interdisciplinary conference emphasizing rigorous approaches to the study of consciousness and its place in the universe.Topical areas include neuroscience, philosophy, psychology, cognitive science, biology, quantum physics and quantum brain biology, cosmology, meditation, altered states, artificial intelligence/machine consciousness, the nature of reality, culture and experiential phenomenology. Held annually since 1994…
Ancient religions have an explanation.
From the priests of the Egyptian temples to today’s secret societies…this model [of explaining how matter comes from mind] has always been conceived of as a series of thoughts emanating from the cosmic mind. Pure mind to begin with, these thought-emanations…, energy…became gas, then liquid and finally solids…
These emanations have also always been thought of as in some sense…intelligent…
The reality of everyday experience is that thoughts are quite routinely introduced…The ancients understood this ‘somewhere else’ as being some-one else, the someone being a god, an angel or a spirit…emanations from the great cosmic mind – Thought-Beings in other words. What I am asking you to consider now is that these great Thought-Beings expressed themselves through people. If today we naturally think of people thinking, in ancient times they thought of Thoughts peopling…
For example, Alexander the Great or Napoleon were vehicles for a great spirit…No one could oppose them and they succeeded in everything they did – until the spirit left them…
In this history gods and spirits control the material world and exercise power over it. We will see too, how sometimes disembodied beings break through, unbidden…commerce with the spirits was always considered highly dangerous
If you believe that matter came before mind, you have to explain how a chance coming together of chemicals creates consciousness, which is difficult.
If, on the other hand, you believe that matter is precipitated by a cosmic mind, you have the equally difficult problem of explaining how, of providing a working model.
Not if we logically continue to draw logical conclusions from what has been deduced so far.
There is an infinite Singularity of energy responsible for producing mass / Creation.
The Laws of Physics demonstrate Intelligent Design in Creation.
Therefore Consciousness is a defining attribute of the Singularity Creator.
Therefore Consciousness in Creation results from being extensions or “splitting off” of an Intelligent Singularity.
A simple example is the organized process of cloud formation and precipitation, following laws of physics. Wind energy forms mass / clouds through heat energy, which then split off.
But the wind energy is ever present.
“The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit [not limited to time, space or energy].” (John 3:8)
Physical science obstinately refuses to learn about this hyper dimensional / spirit aspect of reality by deliberately limited itself to strictly material substance in time and ignoring the fundamental Law of Physics that this mass is equivalent to energy when the infinity is involved: m=Ec2,
We are left with religious revelation.
At its most general, pantheism may be understood positively as the view that God is identical with the cosmos, the view that there exists nothing which is outside of God, or else negatively as the rejection of any view that considers God as distinct from the universe…
(1) Many of the world’s religious traditions and spiritual writings are marked by pantheistic ideas and feelings. This is particularly so for example, in Hinduism of the Advaita Vedanta school, in some varieties of Kabbalistic Judaism, in Celtic spirituality, and in Sufi mysticism.
(2) Another vital source of pantheistic ideas is to be found in literature, for example, in such writers as Goethe, Coleridge, Wordsworth, Emerson, Walt Whitman, D.H. Lawrence, and Robinson Jeffers. Although it should be added that, far from being limited to high culture, pantheistic themes are familiar, too, in popular media, for example in such films as Star Wars, Avatar, and The Lion King.
(3) Thirdly, as it is in this article, pantheism may be considered philosophically.
The Bible reports extensively about consciousness deriving from the Singularity Creator.
“the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living [connected] soul…all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, (Genesis 2:7, 6:17)
“For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now…waiting for…the redemption…” (Romans 8:22-23)
- The Bible presents YHVH as a person by which all things consist, with the purpose of forming a family of loved ones.
“the invisible God…all things were created by him, and for him…and by him all things consist…And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind [soul] by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled [brought into unity with him].” (Colossian 1:15-17,21)
Psychologically a person is a soul. Physiologically a soul is the neural network of bioelectrical connections formed by interacting with one’s environment and especially social relationships.
In a thought-provoking new paper, a physicist suggests the whole universe could be a single neural network—a competing “theory of everything” that could unite quantum and classical mechanics, he says.
If this is true…it would mean pretty enormous things for the nature of the universe…
The root problem with…a theory…that defines the very nature of the universe itself – is that it usually ends up replacing one proxy-for-god with another…
In this paper we discussed a possibility that the entire universe on its most fundamental level is a neural network. This is a very bold claim. We are not just saying that the artificial neural networks can be useful for analyzing physical systems or for discovering physical laws, we are saying that this is how the world around us actually works…
If we’re all nodes in a neural network, what’s the network’s purpose?
Can Creation be so hard for us humans to understand?
The old philosophical question can be reframed as “If God speaks and there is no-one to hear him, is there any sound?”
Carrying through this concept – if God is love, but there is no-one to love, can he love, i.e. be loving, in reality? Anyone else besides me experience what’s called unrequited love? It does take more than one for love to exist.
Which leads to an interesting question – did God’s soul develop, like humans’ do, as he interacted in the social milieu and environment he created? Did he in fact create this in order to self-transcend, just like humans mature when they marry and have children?
Scientifically, it makes sense.
From a religious perspective, when Yeshua of Nazareth presented himself as “that Prophet, the hope of Israel” as prophesied in the Jewish scriptures, many Jews revolted against the idea that a monotheistic God of the Shema could be worshipped as a human being.
We see in John…Greek pagan concepts and philosophies as a tool for communicating Jesus as the Logos to a Christianized Gentile audience…Heraclitus of Ephesus used the word Logos around 500 BCE to describe his concept of the regularity with which the universe seemed to operate. The universe was a divine machine and Heraclitus credited the Logos (literally the reason) as the ultimate rationale which secretly operated the universe and the heavens above. [Emphases added.]
The Logos was…responsible for keeping the ratio of all things in proportion, much like the balance of Eastern yin (dark) and yang (light). The cult of Hermes made use of this to describe their Hermetic corpus written about in the Poimandres:
“The [Poimandres] writer fell into a deep and heavy trance, in which there appeared to him a being who introduced himself as Poimandres (Shepherd of Men), “the Mind of Authority.” Poimandres then shows the mystic a vision, in which he sees a great light and a great darkness, respectively reality and matter. From the light comes “a Holy Logos,” …the “shining Son of God,” who proceeds from Mind itself…”
By the beginning of the Common Era, the Logos was a deeply felt and intricate part of Greek thought…It was well established that the Logos was a divinely felt presence of God, but no philosopher could find a more practical implementation for how the Logos actually mattered to humans and their lives. The man who would provide this meaning and give personified substance to the Logos at the beginning of the Common Era was Philo.
Philo of Alexandria (30 BCE – 45 CE)…was a Jew of the dispersion, and observed the mitzvot [religious rites like Passover], yet like a lot of cosmopolitan Alexandrians of the time, worshipped the Greek gods too. Philo believed that the two worlds were not irreconcilable and the Logos was his attempt at melding Yahwism with the Greek vision of God…[who] believed that God was inherently “unknowable.” He was beyond human understanding and all attempts to describe God would end in failure. However…If one could achieve the Hermetic level of mystical awareness as chronicled in the Poimandres, one will be able to experience God.
Yahweh, however, was much different in that he was easily accessible and constantly busied himself with the details of everyday Jewish life…Yahweh was the opposite of the philosophic construct of the Greek Unknowable; he was nearby and could be reached easily just by calling out to him.
Philo’s work bridged this gap, postulating an ousia of God, or a singular essence, which is the unknowable, and an energeiai (energy) / Spirit which was the very thoughts of God. God’s energy could interact and touch the lives of mortals despite the remote ousia which was inaccessible to man…The Logos was a mediator for God; making it possible to realize the energy of God, and thus, by extension, the impossible ousia of God Himself…
Philo’s Word was extremely popular among Jews and non-Jews alike, successfully splitting God into multiple personifications that pagan worshippers would later refine further from Bi- to Trinitarian concepts that we are familiar with today. We first see the application of the philosophy of the Logos in the prologue of the Gospel of John which begins by proclaiming Philo’s triumph:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God …. The same was in the beginning with God … and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father [God]…” (John 1:1-14)
John has promulgated the Logos in a radically new way…
Jesus’ appeal to readers of Philo’s synthesis of Greek philosophy with Jewish spirituality can be discerned in John’s gospel, such as the following.
“much people that were come to the feast…certain Greeks among them that came up to worship at the feast: The same came therefore to Philip…and desired him, saying, Sir, we would see Jesus…
Bear in mind that being named “Philip” indicates that this Jewish man was Hellenized, most likely by his parents. In land recently ravaged by the Greek warlord Antiochus Epiphanes, naming a boy after the Greek warlord father of of the ultimate Greek warlord Alexander the Great is the equivalent in our culture of naming a boy Hitler.
Also interesting that “Philip” is simply the English version of the Greek “Philo.”
Interesting that Philip is mentioned by name 11 times in the book of John, and was among the first to minister to non-Jews: Greek widows, the Samaritans, the Ethiopian eunuch, and outreach in the Gentile city of Caesarea.
Then Jesus said unto them, Yet a little while is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you…While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light…He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me [YHVH / I AM / Singularity Creator]. And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.“ (John 12:12-35)
The [Jewish] Essenes wrote extensively about the Children of Light who were constantly engaged in a battle against their nemesis, the Wicked Priest who was of darkness. The contrasts of those who walk in the light and those lost in the dark are played heavily in John….
Early Christians most likely practiced then-common spiritual journeys that were widespread and written extensively about in Persian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Greek, Roman, Jewish and Christian literature…religious contemporaries from whom the Christians drew their converts, desired to verify their religion by making a spiritual journey and seeking the divinity on the higher planes of existence where he dwelled…unless one undertake this journey, they cannot achieve everlasting life…being “born again” is necessary [except a man be born again…of…the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God” (John 3:3-5)].
Some modern Christian believers are familiar with this concept of being born again through a spirit and regard it as unique to Christianity…the pagan Mithras Liturgy, a guidebook of sorts that assists in the [Mithraic] Eucharist and prepares the sojourner for his heavenly journey…advises the seeker of the Sun-god (father of Mithras) to pray saying:
“[F]irst beginning of my beginning, …spirit of spirit, the first spirit in me, …now if it be your will, ...give me over to immortal birth and, following that, to my underlying nature, so that, after the present need which is pressing me exceedingly, I may gaze upon the immortal beginning with the immortal spirit, …that I may be born again in thought.“
The common features between Jesus’ and the older religions’ details on being received into the spirit world are properly understood as having come from the same original source. That would be the Singularity Creator and Sustainer.
“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past” (Hebrews 1:1)
They had it backwards.
A mortal human could return to a state of unity with the created by the monotheistic Singularity God of the Torah.
“I will put my laws into their mind…and I will be to them a God…”
Think scientifically, not legal does and don’ts. These laws are hyper dimensional states of infinite being, overriding time, entropy, chaos and destruction.
“And they shall not teach…Know [learn about] the Lord: for all shall know me [experience fully, cherish, pay attention to, be bodily united with.” (Hebrews 8:10-11) The second Greek word used for ‘know’ is the same word used to describe a man and woman becoming one through sexual intercourse.
The debates among Gentiles was likewise centered on whether or not he fit into their scriptures.
This is evident in John’s terms for life and death. We need to understand the 1st century lingo if we are going to understand John’s message.