A Philosophical Dissertation on Consciousness
A Philosophical Dissertation on Consciousness
By Punkerslut
Introduction
The question of what our consciousness is, or how or where it
is produced, has been the subject of much philosophical inquiry
over the past centuries. Some have relied upon spiritual
conclusions, claiming that consciousness is one's soul (though
today, the term "soul" often means one's emotional
individuality). There are different claims across ancient
civilization, offering the idea that the soul exists in a
physical part of the body, be it the head, the heart, or the
genitals. However, with the rise of science, there is a new
approach to the question of consciousness. The importance given
to consciousness varies sometimes from individual to individual,
from school of thought to school of thought. Some philosophers
simply marvel at the complexity of the thing, sometimes almost
reflectively. Just as some philosophers regard it as a spectular
thing that requires explanation, some philosophers regard the
question of consciousness as an important underyling factor in
their entire philosophy.
For example, as a Vegetarian, I do not actively engage in any
activity which causes suffering or unwanted death to a conscious
being. Naturally, since I have this philosophical concept of
rights, I want to understand this scientific concept of
consciousness. Sometimes I am asked whether I would regard the
rights of a plant, bacteria, or an insect. To these three
organisms, I have no difficulty answering. A plant and bacteria
do not contain a consciousness, whereas evidence suggest that
insects have a sort of consciousness. But whether or not I am
right or wrong in such a response, I will always say, "I regard
the rights of conscious beings. None others." If they inquire
into which organsms are conscious and if I do not know, I
respond that the question of consciousness is one of science,
not one of philosophy. As far as how consciousness works, I do
not know. I only hope to provide questions that I have thought
of endlessly, with no conclusion. To quote Scientific American
about a story of Neuroscientists...
"Koch, 44, directs the computation and neural systems program at
Caltech. He arrived here in 1986, a time when consciousness
research was still considered career suicide even for
established brain researchers. But high-profile attention to the
subject by Nobelists Gerald M. Edelman and Francis Crick,
coupled with advances in functional brain imaging, has elevated
the field--and its investigators--to respectability.
"Neurobiologists have since given up the notion that Koch may be
dangerously offbeat, despite his having tattooed his arm last
summer with the Apple Computer logo to demonstrate his love of
the Macintosh (a zeal not even matched by Steve Jobs). The
neuroscientist leads about 20 researchers and calls their
mission to explain consciousness 'one of the major unsolved
problems of modern science.'" [Scientific American, July, 2001.]
Consciousness According to Science...
Brain...
"All thoughts, emotions, sensations, movements, and desires have
their origins in brain processes. Without a functioning brain,
the human being is reduced to a vegetative state, unable to
perform any actions or pessos any feelings, and left without he
ability even to alter bodily function in rseponse to change.
While this article will consider the human brain, which is more
complex and highly developed than that of any other animal, the
brains of all mammels, and indeed most vertebrates, are
remarkably similar.
"The central nervous system is composed of the brain and the
spinal cord. The nerves that supply the rest of the body are
attached to the brain and sinal cord and include the motor
nerves, which activate muscels, and the sensory nerves, which
bring information into the central nervous system. In addition,
the nerves that supply the internal organs are found outside the
brain and spinal cord." [Collier's Encyclopedia, under "Brain."]
Morality...
"Many animals, however, certainly sympathise with each other's
distress or danger. This is the case even with birds. Captain
Stansbury found on a salt lake in Utah an old and completely
blind pelican, which was very fat, and must have been well fed
for a long time by his companions. Mr. Blyth, as he informs me,
saw Indian crows feeding two or three of their companions which
were blind; and I have heard of an analogous case with the
domestic cock. We may, if we choose, call these actions
instinctive; but such cases are much too rare for the
development of any special instinct. I have myself seen a dog,
who never passed a cat who lay sick in a basket, and was a great
friend of his, without giving her a few licks with his tongue,
the surest sign of kind feeling in a dog." [The Descent of Man,
by Charles Darwin, chapter 4, part I.]
Pain and Suffering...
"When animals suffer from an agony of pain, they generally
writhe about with frightful contortions; and those which
habitually use their voices utter piercing cries or groans.
Almost every muscle of the body is brought into strong action.
With man the mouth may be closely compressed, or more commonly
the lips are retracted, with the teeth clenched or ground
together. There is said to be "gnashing of teeth" in hell; and I
have plainly heard the grinding of the molar teeth of a cow
which was suffering acutely from inflammation of the bowels. The
female hippopotamus in the Zoological Gardens, when she produced
her young, suffered greatly; she incessantly walked about, or
rolled on her sides, opening and closing her jaws, and
clattering her teeth together. With man the eyes stare wildly as
in horrified astonishment, or the brows are heavily contracted.
Perspiration bathes the body, and drops trickle down the face.
The circulation and respiration are much affected. Hence the
nostrils are generally dilated and often quiver; or the breath
may be held until the blood stagnates in the purple face. If the
agony be severe and prolonged, these signs all change; utter
prostration follows, with fainting or convulsions." [The
Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, by Charles
Darwin, chapter 3.]
Consciousness: What I Do Not Know...
As far as various philosophical thoughts go, I have often been
hesitant to publish thoughts without first finding a conclusion
(one, of course, based on evidence and Reason). However, as much
as I thought on the topic of consciousness, the more I think the
more I become convinced that only science, demonstration, and
observation, could discover the answers to my questions. The
following is an inquiry concerning consciousness...
Our brains, like all other physical things, is composed of
matter. In this sense, it is composed of different atoms, such
as Carbon and Nitrogen, interlocking to form structures. The
structures of the brain give it the capability of consciousness.
The question I am presenting is not how consciousness can arrise
from basic elements, but how reliant upon the molecules
consciousness is. The Atomic Theory can be defined as follows:
the theory that all matter is composed of atoms, and that all
atoms are composed of simple structures, including protons. All
protons are incredibly similar in structure, and an atom's
individual is defined by the number of protons it has. A
Hydrogen atom, for example, has 1 proton. A Helium atom differs
from a Hydrogen atom in that it has 2 protons. Carbon has 4
protons. Iron has 77 protons. Gold has 79 protons. Silver has 47
protons. Uranium has 92 protons. The difference between these
elements differs in protons, and a proton changes other factors.
For each proton, there is a neutron. For each proton, there is
an attraction to another electron. One gold atom, though, will
react the same as any other gold atom, as long as conditions are
the same.
Describing the Atomic Theroy is only a preliminary to the
question of consciousness. Since one Carbon atom reacts the same
as any other Carbon atom, what would happen if a Carbon atom in
someone's brain was quickly replaced with a different Carbon
atom? Since all Carbon atoms react the same, the consciousness
of the person would not be altered. This would mean that their
thoughts, their ideas, their emotions, their memories, and their
personality would not change. Talking to them would not be like
talking to an entirely different person. No change would be
noticeable. But, what did change? It was only one solitary atom.
Still, the organ which produces conscious has one part different.
It is important to understand the different consciousnesses
when examining this. I do not mean the many different
consciousnesses within a single person, but with many people.
For example, if one person's brain was entirely reconstructed to
be identical, both people would be different entities. The first
person thinks for themself, just like the second person. But,
importantly, they are different beings. The first is the first
and the second is the second. If one were to have a thought, it
would not give that thought to the other. By claiming that each
brain is its own entity, I mean that each is composed of its own
matter and produces its own consciousness. When we alter one
Carbon atom, by switching it with another, we are changing the
matter of the brain, though the design remains changeless. The
one atom changed. Would that mean a different consciousness is
produced? When I speak of a difference, I speak of entity. Would
the consciousness change from the state it had before the new
Carbon atom to the state after it had the new Carbon atom, this
change being the same difference between the entity of
consciousness existing between two different persons? WHat would
happen if we replaced every atom in the brain with a new
identical one? It would be a new existing consciousness, just
acting the same, believeng the same, doing the same. The
consciousness acts the same, but it differes as an entity. You
can have two identical shoes, for example, but they are
difefrent in that they are not made out of the same exact
matter. The same question exists with the brain and
consciousness. The brain, an organ made of matter, produces the
consciousness, but if the brain is altered by one identical
atom, is consciousness different in entity?
Conclusions
I have tried my best to offer a simple, understandable
simplification of my ideas on this subject. Perhaps, though, my
thinking of the question of consciousness is diluted by the idea
that it is special, or perhaps it is impossible to make such
thoughts accurately given what little we know of it, given the
poor knowledge obtained by science. Whatever the case may be,
consciousness is consciousness, and I have offered my questions
and thoughts on it.
www.punkerslut.com
For Life, Punkerslut