Navigating Uncertainty

[Casper_Hesp]

@gbrooks9

The issue of Epiphenomenon, in an Atheistic Universe, is one of proof. How do you prove anyone other than yourself is conscious? This is the riddle of Solipsism.

Solipsism is not a riddle, in my opinion. I view it as a faulty application of the principle of Occam’s Razor. It reminds me of the discussion with @pacificmaelstrom some time ago. His claim was that the material universe does not exist and that reality is only consciousness. This is one quote from my response to him:

@Casper_Hesp

The measurement rod of “simplicity” for applying Occam’s Razor is explanatory power. The main success of modern science is in showing that physical reality can be described very well in terms of a relatively small set of principles. There is (as of yet) no known set of principles which can govern “mind” independently of physical reality. There is no explanatory power at all in assuming that everything is construed by minds. Every experience would require some ad hoc postulation by God, who would be giving us the illusion of physical regularities.

I hope that makes clear why solipsism is not a simple explanation of reality.

@gbrooks9

Attaching electrodes on a subject’s shaved head, and concluding: “yep, he is awake!” - - is not the same thing as concluding “yep, he has Consciousness”.

Although humorous, that’s a gross mischaracterization of current research on consciousness. I admit the construct is difficult to define straightforwardly, but that does not mean it completely evades empirical research. To dismiss it in such a way also comes across as very condescending towards the scientists who are devoting their careers to this topic. Wouldn’t it be wiser to speak more humbly on topics of which you don’t have much background knowledge? I know you have strong opinions about many things and you are surely entitled to hold them, but the extreme confidence with which you profess your own opinion becomes tiresome at times.

Anyway, I believe it is intellectually unfair to say that it’s impossible for an Atheist to incorporate the existence of consciousness into his or her worldview. That’s overstating your case. Atheists don’t necessarily need to be able to have definite “proofs” of everything.

Instead of just disagreeing with your statements, I will try to present a line of reasoning which is more palatable to me. I would actually be comfortable phrasing the emergence of consciousness through evolutionary processes as an important and convincing pointer towards the higher, timeless form of consciousness of God and even of angelic beings. The source of a reality which allows for the emergence of consciousness, would most plausibly (to me) be an even higher form of consciousness. I don’t want to get awkward with analogies here, but one could compare it to a computer simulating a virtual computer. The host computer would always have to be more powerful than the simulated computer. In the same way, God’s consciousness would have to be in some way “more-than-personal”, of a higher order than ours. But note that this would be just a pointer indicating God’s existence, nothing more. That avoids overstating our case and renders the argument more convincing in the final analysis.