This paper argues ... — Copernicus
By dissolving the false dichotomy between matter and mind, we restore a unified vision of existence: consciousness as the apex of complexity, not its contradiction. — Copernicus
One thing I can give you any amount of evidence for, is that we do not have 'a unified vision of existence'. If we did, we would be able to tackle our problems - poverty, climate change, overpopulation, pollution, and ongoing intractable global human conflict. — unenlightened
In view of our failures in this regard, it seems somewhat pessimistic to call us 'the apex of consciousness'; I think we have a long way to go yet. — unenlightened
Human cognition exists along a continuum of increasing physical complexity:
• Sentience – the ability to feel or experience; found widely among animals with nervous systems.
• Sapience – higher reasoning, foresight, and abstraction; a hallmark of human cortical evolution.
• Consciousness – awareness of the environment and oneself; emerging from multi-level neural feedback loops.
• Conscience – moral awareness; the social and reflective layer of consciousness shaped by empathy and memory.
Each is built upon physical substrates—neurons, synapses, chemical gradients—yet each transcends its parts through emergent organization. — Copernicus
Life and mind depend on the emergence of codes. The information processing possibilities of genes, neurons, words and numbers. So how do codes “just emerge” from more complex physics?
Biology starts where a molecule can be a message. Is that simply “more physics”. A property of matter that simply follows from a continuing continuum of complexity?
Or is it something a little more novel? — apokrisis
We're still at the top of the animal kingdom, — Copernicus
we restore a unified vision of existence — Copernicus
If you do not see the contradiction — unenlightened
'we' at the top do not seem to be unified with the animal kingdom as long as we are obsessed with 'our' dominance of 'them'. — unenlightened
Can you ask in simpler terms exactly what your objection was? — Copernicus
For example, the genetic code (A–T–G–C) is just chemistry, but evolution selected the combinations that could store and replicate information. — Copernicus
The key difference lies in the informational architecture, not the physics underneath it. So life and mind aren’t exceptions to physical law — they’re extensions of it. The universe, in a way, learning how to encode itself. — Copernicus
If biology starts at the point where “a molecule can be a message,” then that’s the threshold where matter becomes reflexive — where it starts encoding its own persistence. — Copernicus
In short, codes aren’t supernatural — they’re emergent designs within physics. — Copernicus
Well, our sapience is a tangible proof of our excellence above the rest of the earthly creatures. — Copernicus
The parts of the body were having a meeting, trying to decide who was the one in charge...
"I should be in charge," said the brain , "Because I run all the body's systems, so without me nothing would happen."
"I should be in charge," said the blood , "Because I circulate oxygen all over so without me you'd waste away."
"I should be in charge," said the stomach," Because I process food and give all of you energy."
"I should be in charge," said the legs, "because I carry the body wherever it needs to go."
"I should be in charge," said the eyes, "Because I allow the body to see where it goes."
"I should be in charge," said the rectum, "Because Im responsible for waste removal."
All the other body parts laughed at the rectum And insulted him, so in a huff, he shut down tight. Within a few days, the brain had a terrible headache, the stomach was bloated, the legs got wobbly, the eyes got watery, and the blood Was toxic. They all decided that the rectum should be the boss
The Moral of the story? Even though the others do all the work.... The ass hole is usually in charge
III. Evolutionary Foundations
From the first single-celled organisms, life has evolved mechanisms to process information about its surroundings. Bacteria move toward nutrients (chemotaxis) and away from toxins; while simple, these are proto-cognitive behaviors—rudimentary information processing loops.
As organisms developed nervous systems, the ability to distinguish pain from pleasure, safety from danger, and kin from stranger conferred adaptive advantages.
Human consciousness, therefore, is not a cosmic anomaly but the peak of an ancient biological trajectory—the culmination of matter learning to model and predict itself. — Copernicus
IV. Emergence: When Physics Becomes Experience
Though each neuron obeys physical law, the collective pattern of billions of neurons yields subjective experience. This phenomenon, known as emergence, marks the transition from matter behaving mechanically to matter behaving meaningfully.
A single water molecule is not “wet,” yet collective behavior gives rise to wetness. Likewise, a single neuron does not “think,” but structured neural networks do.
Hence, consciousness does not violate physical law—it is physical law in a higher-order configuration. — Copernicus
If each neuron disobeys physical law, which seems to be the case as quantum physics describes activities which disobey physical law, obeying laws of probability instead, then this is evidence against physicalism. — Metaphysician Undercover
Your claim of superiority entails a separation. This separation contradicts the other claim of a unified vision. — unenlightened
We are the universe contemplating itself — Copernicus
If this is true, then you are trying to say we are superior to ourself - superior to the universe. You thereby recreate the division you deny. — unenlightened
My problem with the concept of emergence is that it does not seem to be an explanatory concept that provides us with a mechanism for moving from one level of reality to another without presupposing the already established levels of reality. And if it has no explanatory power (reconstruction rule), then I do not understand why anyone would choose physicalism as a general ontology of the world. — JuanZu
For example, how do we explain Pythagoras' theorem with the concepts of physics? Emergence should explain how we move from talking about mass, particles, velocity, momentum, etc., to talking about numbers without presupposing knowledge of numbers as sui generis entities. — JuanZu
Mathematics is a language that describes the world. That’s it. — T Clark
From the first single-celled organisms, life has evolved mechanisms to process information about its surroundings. Bacteria move toward nutrients (chemotaxis) and away from toxins; while simple, these are proto-cognitive behaviors—rudimentary information processing loops. — Copernicus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.