This sounds similar to my own worldview, except for some of the outdated terminology. "Experience" and "Consciousness" and "Panpsychism" are terms that are normally defined from the human perspective. So I have substituted the less anthro-morphic term "Information" as a reference to the fundamental element of the universe --- by contrast to "occasions of experience". Hence, "Information" is universal in Nature, but "Consciousness" is a limited and late-emerging phenomenon of evolution.Just to clarify, I think consciousness is form of integrated unified experience. I think experience is universal. Mind (a less unified and integrated form of experience) is widespread in nature and “consciousness” is a fairly rare form of mind and experience. I thus fall into the category of panexperientialism or a form of Whiteheadian process philosophy which some classify as a variety of panpsychism. — prothero
if I experience something that you don't, how then do I know it exists (...) Said another way, how does one know if that experience exists if one doesn't experience it himself? — 3017amen
There’s no profit in thinking experience is something that exists.
Ontology (from the Greek word "ontos", meaning "being") is the study of being, as in existence, or reality. — Pfhorrest
Mww
There’s no profit in thinking experience is something that exists.
Can you summarize what argument you are having...... — Zelebg
........and what is the point you're making? — Zelebg
The first sentence of Wikipedia on Ontology and the source for that both mention existence as a part of the subject matter. — Pfhorrest
Unfortunately, defining "experience" and "existence" has been a subject of debate in philosophy for millennia. Scientists typically try to limit experience to Empirical or A Posteriori Knowledge gained from sensory impressions. But Philosophers and Theologians often include Theoretical or A Priori (tautological) knowledge in their discussions of Consciousness. So, whether there is profit in talking about the ontological "existence" of Experience may depend on your worldview : Materialism or Idealism. Is unproven, but reasonable, Theoretical knowledge a form of non-sensory Experience? Some call Reason the sixth sense.There’s no profit in thinking experience is something that exists. Existence is a condition only of sensible objects, and experience is very far from a sensible object. — Mww
Look at what it says under 'etymology', footnote 2 — Wayfarer
And the point is: Nope, no way...not on even a good day in hell...can a category be used to underwrite a cognition not originated in sensibility.
I’m assuming the comment I was responding to implied that experience has some kind of existence.
We can think whatever we want about “experience”; we just don’t gain anything by saying it exists.
You: Existence of experience is what defines the difference between conscious and unconscious human
Me: Experience is what defines the difference between conscious and unconscious human
Scientists typically try to limit experience to Empirical or A Posteriori Knowledge gained from sensory impressions. But Philosophers and Theologians often include Theoretical or A Priori (tautological) knowledge in their discussions of Consciousness — Gnomon
The confounding problem here is that human beings are capable of acting as-if concepts that exist only in the mind (e.g. fictional characters) are real. — Gnomon
you need to explain what do you assume the word “existence” means by specifying your definition — Zelebg
Oh fercrissakes, no I do not. I don’t give a crap how existence should be defined, in order to show the concept “existence” as it is already defined, or at least understood, adds nothing to the conception “experience”, in a synthetic a priori logical judgement.
This represents a long-standing principle of basic epistemological metaphysics, at least since Aristotle.
Be really cool, though, to get to a similar eco-system, evolved from a similar set of conditions.....and see no evidence of life at all. In which case, I guess we would indeed be special — Mww
...how did self-awareness evolve from the universe?
If matter makes the clay that makes the bricks, what consiousness made the matter? — 3017amen
Thanks ...but I must have missed something, it doesn't explain how consciousness came from matter ? — 3017amen
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.