Origins of Consciousness

As below, so above.

There are so many theories of consciousness out there. Some say it's about a soul, some say there's a cosmic consciousness we're part of. Some say it must be all brain, etc. But we still haven't any real evidence for any of them and they are all complex. So, after 60 years of study, I'll give you a simple/complex logical alternative based on science and what we observe and know.

My theory is: Consciousness is the result of, and a complex version of, auto response.

So before I begin I want to define certain terms. I am using the term consciousness as in human style language based thought. When you think, you use language.

But there is another aspect: Awareness. To be aware doesn't require language based thought. The language of awareness is feelings/emotions, and we'll be discussing those as we go.

So let's start at the beginning with atoms. There is one rule atoms follow that has always fascinated me. It's the key to this whole thing: Every atom must try to maintain/reach its lowest possible energy level. It's the bases of entropy. This isn't easy. Why? Because all interactions cause a rise in energy, and conflicts cause major rises in energy. And conflict demands resolution.

When atoms of different types interact there are several possible interactions. They can destroy each other, move/get pushed away, or merge. Once they merge they create new things/chemicals etc in the macro world, and find a new lowest possible energy level.

So how does all this happen? Auto response based on the nature of the atoms interacting. Many things can't merge, while carbon can merge with and facilitate mergers between many different types of atoms. Lucky us. After all, we and everything else are all just made of atoms. And if we look at it that way it seems more than reasonable that we should show the same traits, and we do: As below, so above.
So are atoms conscious? Not likely. They follow their nature. Are they aware? Probably not. But do they feel? What I mean is, how do they know another atom is near? And I don't mean know in a human sense. Can it feel/sense proximity? Well, if a stray electron binds to an atom, what does it do? It throws it at another atom and thus the two bond in a game of hot potato.

But even if it doesn't sense anything, that's not the end of my hypothesis. One thing we can say is: reaching its lowest possible energy level is an atoms basic need, and basic needs are very involved in consciousness, as we'll see.

Do you need a brain to be conscious? Yes. But do you need a brain to be aware? No. Bacteria/single cells are aware of their environment, use it, and can adapt to it. This has been shown clearly in several scientific studies. We know the very basics of biology have at least rudimentary awareness. No brain required.

Plants are also definitely aware. Let a vine grow with nothing around to climb. A few weeks later place a pole a couple feet away, and watch the vine reach for the pole over the next couple days. It has no eyes, no brain. How does it know a pole is there? Yet it clearly does.

So brains are not required, but anything biological has basic needs for its survival. Those needs drive it to act and resolve them. Its auto response. Response to what? Needs? Yes. But how do they know they have needs? Needs in biology are felt, triggering an auto response, until a resolution is felt.

So as biology grew more complex and more and more cells merged it developed central control cells: a brain. The brain is needed in things that need to run or fly and navigate. But we say animals live on instinct/auto response. And that's true. Animals show feelings and emotions just like humans do. They have a much more complex form of awareness than plants or bacteria. Some even use tools. But only humans have a complex language, and that makes all the difference, along with billions more neurons.

So do humans use auto response? Yes. A ball is heading toward your face. Depending on your experience with balls you might move out of the way or catch it. You do this automatically without thinking about it. Deliberate about it and it's already hit you in the eye. Conscious thought is way too slow.

When you learn to ride a bike you have to think about a lot of things like balance, breaks, pedals, steering etc. You usually fall off at least once. But the more you learn the less you think about it. Eventually it becomes second nature like an extension of self. Everything we do well, we do on auto. So what are we doing? We are storing what we learn in memory, but more interesting: we're modifying our auto response.

What do we call this part of the brain? The subconscious. Obviously the subconscious is highly aware. It triggers emotions/feelings that demand resolution. Then it tells consciousness what you're doing about it. This has also been proven scientifically by neurologists. The subconscious knows what you're going to do at times several seconds before it informs consciousness.

It will also always give an auto response answer. A test was done on several thousand university students. The simple question was: A ball and bat cost a dollar and ten cents. The bat by itself costs exactly one dollar more than the ball. How much is the ball?

They were told to give the first response that popped into their heads. 90 percent plus got it wrong, and most of them said ten cents. What was your first thought? Only one person I tried it on got it right instantly, and they taught math problem solving. They were able to catch the ball instantly without thinking about it because their auto response was trained for it.

Now, all animals live in the subconscious. But for them it's their form of consciousness. They can all learn and alter their auto response. They can show emotions like love and hate, happy, sad, depressed, etc. Even cells and bacteria can communicate. Don't need human consciousness for any of that.

Then what's the difference? Where does human consciousness come from? The answer is simple. Language. Again, humans have billions more neurons than any other animal. With the development of language along with a much more developed frontal lobe we developed a an even higher awareness. Other animals communicate with sounds too, but each word is a complex concept all on its own. We are aware of our needs and emotions and explain them to ourselves and thereby deliberate. We can accept an auto response or think about it and reject it, changing the response for next time. That's what our enhanced frontal lobe does.

Try thinking without language. It's very hard. When meditating one thing they teach is the quiet mind. This means you are trying to shut down your conscious mind. If you accomplish this you're living in the subconscious. You still have feelings and emotions. You can enter states of bliss. But the second you have a conscious thought, even one word, it's gone. So it is my contention and that of a seemingly growing number, that our form of consciousness developed from the process of developing complex language.

Hence consciousness is just highly complex awareness. And as I said: awareness is due to auto response in biology. Interactions cause conflicts, mergers, etc from the atom to the human. Conflict causes high energy states. Nothing more high energy than war. And such states demand resolution and a return to a more peaceful lower energy level. Entropy applies even to wars.

Needs drive actions and interactions. Emotions/feelings are an indication of a need or a need fulfilled. They are a result of the sensor information we get. See a dragon? The emotion is: Run! Don't stand there thinking about it or it'll get me!

So what is consciousness for? It's main function is deliberation and teaching the subconscious. But I'm not saying they are different separate things. It's all us. A human is their genetic /biological predispositions set against our specific environments including experience, learning, parenting influences etc. That entire process manifests as our will. It's an auto response.

Do you do what you like? Do you reject what you don't like? Yes! But did you choose your likes and dislikes? No. You just love ice cream or you don't, or you don't care. Whatever the case you don't choose what you like or dislike, you just get feelings. Auto response.

But yes, you can learn and change even your likes and dislikes. Not even your genetic predispositions are unmovable. Genetics is changed by environment. Even though everything we do is in order to fulfill needs, real or not, and to appease likes and dislikes we don't choose to have even though we feel like we like having them, and everything is in essence an auto response, we're still responsible for what we do. Why? Because through language we know exactly what is expected of us. Don't harm others or you'll be harmed or put in jail if the law gets you. Don't take what's not yours, etc.

We know these things. We understand the consequences of our actions for ourselves and others. We can learn and understand. We can change our future responses. We can have a less high negative energy life if we respect each other. Unless we're unable to learn and understand due to mental illness, damage or dysfunction, we're responsible for our actions.
All that said, from atom to human everything is auto response. Biology has basic needs and have a way to sense them/feel them , which triggers an auto response. This system is awareness. All biology has awareness from very basic to very complex. The more complex the biology the more complex its awareness to the point of consciousness , self consciousness, and human consciousness.

My contention is that consciousness is easy. Auto response to proto awareness to rudimentary awareness, to basic awareness to increasingly complex awareness to what we call consciousness, which relies on a brain and memory, and in the case of humans: the development of complex language which allowed for complex concepts like our search for the truth, and concept of self.

Consciousness is a chaotic system. Chaos theory tells us simplicity becomes complex by following simple rules over and over again under diverse conditions.

As below, so above

Anyone see a logical reason my hypothesis is wrong? I'd love to hear it.