Science and spirituality

[ekim]

But when the 'spirit' have clearly human-like properties, e.g. consciousness, which is of course not present in all living things, then it is anthropocentric.

But even if you are linking it to life forms it remains, if not anthropocentric, but viviocentric (if that is a word), in other words centred on the importance of living things. Now from a cosmological perspective this is still non-sense as there is no requirement whatsoever for life to exist in the cosmos. The cosmos does not need life and the cosmos can, and almost certainly did, exist comfortably without life.

Well, I don't know what 'consciousness' is as a objective property so wouldn't be able to determine whether e.g. a sponge contains it or not.  There is a biocentric idea 'that regards conscious, organic observers as the basis rather than the by-product of the universe, holding that their biological patterns of perception and information processing effectively determine the universe’s space-time structure and its key physical constants'.

I am just a simple minded person so I would not be able to make absolute statements regarding whether the cosmos has needs or not.  There are many Hindu schools of thought and within some of them are methods or practices to detach one's awareness from external objects and internal thought forms so that consciousness prevails in a more pristine 'state'.  To engage in cosmological speculation would be seen as counter productive.

[Sriram]

Humans are regarded as the highest level of consciousness in which form we become capable of self awareness and conscious self development. This is considered important to be able to transcend our material life.

There is nothing anthropocentric about it. We truly are the most complex and self aware organism in existence. There is no doubt about this. We are able to think beyond ourselves and our ego centric point of view.

About consciousness....I have already high lighted in other threads that even plants have consciousness. I have also highlighted how Tononi's IIT supports the idea of panpsychism. I have brought out NDE's to support an after life.

Nothing much more that can be done to explain these matters. 
   

[Bramble]

There is no doubt ...

Great doubt, great awakening
Little doubt, little awakening
No doubt, no awakening

(Buddhist saying)

[ProfessorDavey]

Humans are regarded as the highest level of consciousness in which form we become capable of self awareness and conscious self development.

Considered to be by whom Sriram - oh yes that would be humans.

This is considered important to be able to transcend our material life.

Considered to be important to what - of yes, again that would be humans. I doubt some rock on a moon orbiting a planet in a far, far galaxy would recognise that importance.

There is nothing anthropocentric about it.

So you define things in a completely human-centric manner and then deny you are being anthropocentric

We truly are the most complex and self aware organism in existence.

Are we - how do you know that Sriram. And why is this important except if you take a completely anthropocentric viewpoint. I'm sure other life forms would consider that the attributes humans have might be irrelevant and attributes that they have much more important. If you were a tree I think (if you were a thinking tree) that human's are a bit rubbish as they cannot even generate their own energy from light.

There is no doubt about this. We are able to think beyond ourselves and our ego centric point of view.

You have literally gone beyond parody now Sriram - you have effectively said that there is no doubt that humans are the most advanced organisms and that human characteristics are the most important things ... and then claimed to go beyond our own ego!!! I mean FFS is there anything more egocentric (not to mention anthropocentric) than claiming that there is no doubt that humans are top of the tree, so to speak.

[Gordon]

Humans are regarded as the highest level of consciousness in which form we become capable of self awareness and conscious self development.

Only by some humans.

This is considered important to be able to transcend our material life.

I'm not sure that we do "transcend our material life" - some may think that, but these thoughts seems to be just an example of material stuff working.
 

There is nothing anthropocentric about it. We truly are the most complex and self aware organism in existence. There is no doubt about this. We are able to think beyond ourselves and our ego centric point of view.

That you have no doubt seems, ironically, to be a fairly ego-centric position to adopt.

About consciousness....I have already high lighted in other threads that even plants have consciousness. I have also highlighted how Tononi's IIT supports the idea of panpsychism. I have brought out NDE's to support an after life.

This is just quasi-religious stuff for which there is no credible evidence but, seemingly, and bizarrely to my mind, there are credulous people.

Nothing much more that can be done to explain these matters.

Perhaps because the idea of panpsychism and an 'after-life' are just quasi-religious ideas that needn't be taken seriously, even if they attract enthusisam among the credulous. 
 

[Enki]

Humans are regarded as the highest level of consciousness in which form we become capable of self awareness and conscious self development. This is considered important to be able to transcend our material life.

There is nothing anthropocentric about it. We truly are the most complex and self aware organism in existence. There is no doubt about this. We are able to think beyond ourselves and our ego centric point of view.

About consciousness....I have already high lighted in other threads that even plants have consciousness. I have also highlighted how Tononi's IIT supports the idea of panpsychism. I have brought out NDE's to support an after life.

Nothing much more that can be done to explain these matters. 
 

As most of the assertions in your first two paragraphs have been roundly and, as I see it, successfully challenged, I'll reserve my comments to your paragraph 3, where you say:

About consciousness....I have already high lighted in other threads that even plants have consciousness. I have also highlighted how Tononi's IIT supports the idea of panpsychism. I have brought out NDE's to support an after life.

Most scientists do not accept that plants show consciousness.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00709-020-01579-w

If you can't be arsed to read the details just look at the conclusions. At the very least it starts to show your assertion that 'plants have consciousness'  is decidedly suspect.

On the subject of Integrated Information Theory and Panpsychism, don't forget that even IIT regards consciousness as only possible in a system of at least two elements which have cause/effect potentials on one another, so objects such as rocks which have no phi don't count. I assume you are also aware of some of the objections to IIT, from philosophers such as Searle or scientists such as Aaronson. Indeed Aaronson showed that if you take a physical representation of an expander graph, it could have a higher phi value than the human brain and hence a higher degree of consciousness, which is clearly ludicrous. Also, don't forget that it seems IIT is not consistent with any form of panpsychism that attributes mental properties to basic elements, an idea which is evident in Chalmer's view of panpsychism.

And for your last point about NDEs. You have presented no evidence that link NDEs to the idea of an afterlife at all as has been shown time and time again on this forum.

[Sriram]

All thoughts,  theories and philosophies are of human origin. Chimps and tigers and aliens (to our knowledge) don't do such things. That does not make all our ideas anthropocentric.

The Abrahamic religions considered humans to be the only living things with a soul while all animals were considered as mere automatons created for the benefit of humans. This idea can be considered as anthropocentric.  Not all human thoughts  and philosophies. That is ridiculous!

On earth we are the most complex organisms capable of thinking beyond ourselves. If you know of any other species please let me know.

All life has consciousness and whatever philosophy we come up with has to apply to them as well. Many of you subscribe to a materialistic philosophy....which is neither here nor there. I obviously don't agree with that.

Ego centricity has to do with individual ego and impressions of individual self importance and not with the philosophy of development of consciousness.
 

[Bramble]

Nobody is saying that human ideas are necessarily anthropocentric. Ecocentrism is a human idea. However, the beliefs you articulate on this forum, which form the components of what purports to be a grand cosmic narrative, accord central importance to human life. This is by definition anthropocentric. It’s what the word means.

Even if all life has consciousness the fact remains that you effectively believe all non-human life is unable to realise its cosmic purpose and significance until it takes human form. In other words human life is the final end and goal of all spiritual and conscious evolution in the universe as we know it. We are the unique portal through which consciousness might come to know itself as Brahman. Everything leads up to us. Other creatures are in effect little more than lower steps on a stairway whose destination is humanity. No other being has our special significance in this drama. It’s all really about us.

Your story is certainly more inclusive than the narratives found in Abrahamic religions but not really any less anthropocentric. Why should herons and hedgehogs, for example, be mere stepping stones on a journey to us? That would make them just a means to an end. Of course, for you we are also a means to an end but a much more significant one because the cosmic purpose is never realised in herons and hedgehogs.

Humans engage in spirituality because we have a high degree of self-consciousness, but it is this identification with self that causes us the psychological problems we seek to alleviate by spiritual practice. In other words we are (probably) uniquely ‘disabled’ by our cognitive complexity. Looked at from that perspective our specialness seems less attractive. Your idea of spirituality seems to valorise complexity and seeks progress through advancing knowledge, but maybe what we need is to return to something simpler and more honest. Perhaps, if we can find a little humility, it’s our animal nature that will save us from ourselves.

[Sriram]

That is absurd. Our complexity and the accompanying mental conflicts are a stage forward. These conflicts arise due to self awareness and self analysis which are uniquely human abilities.

Going back to the animal nature is not progress. That would amount to shedding our self analytical abilities. Going forward beyond the human condition by using our self analytical abilities, is progress.

Once we manage to calm the conflicted mind, we go beyond the animal nature which is what is considered as liberation.

By considering other species as stages in the process, we are not demeaning them. We are including them as part of the spiritual evolutionary process. They are part of the different stages of development of consciousness.

[Bramble]

Well, good luck, Sriram, if you really think 'Our complexity and the accompanying mental conflicts are a stage forward'. You'll certainly not be disappointed if more conflict is what you're looking for. Most folk seem to reach for spiritual help because they've had enough of mental conflicts. Quite how you think the conflicted mind will become calmed by the 'progress' of further complexity and accompanying mental conflicts beats me. As far as I know, no non-human animal ever gets itself into that kind of knot. And for the record, we can't 'go back' to our animal nature because we've never left it.

You know, life doesn't have to be this tangled. Sometimes the best way to undo a tricky knot is to stop pulling on it.

Happy Christmas to you.

[Sriram]

Well......Happy Christmas to you too!

[Alan Burns]

Not a great speaker - but some very poignant facts and stats:
The Latest Scientific Evidence of God and the Soul – Fr Robert Spitzer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvghlgftwnE

[Alan Burns]

https://uk.style.yahoo.com/one-five-people-revived-cardiac-150000269.html

[Enki]

https://uk.style.yahoo.com/one-five-people-revived-cardiac-150000269.html

Actually not that new, Alan. Several studies around the 2000s came up with similar results for Western incidences of NDEs for cardiac arrest. E.g. Greyson 2003(23%), Orne 1995(23%), Van Lommel 2001(18%).

I do find it interesting however, if you read further on,  that this article suggests that:
'The team also tested for hidden brain activity during CPR and found spikes in gamma, delta, theta, alpha and beta waves up to an hour into the resuscitation process.'

and that:
'Some of these brain waves normally occur when people are conscious and performing higher mental functions, including thinking, memory retrieval, and conscious perception'.

Seems like NDEs are a result of a physical process.

[Nearly Sane]

https://uk.style.yahoo.com/one-five-people-revived-cardiac-150000269.html

IIRC you are an RC. How do you fit NDEs into that theology? Is it an error or an advert of coming attractions?

[Sriram]

Actually not that new, Alan. Several studies around the 2000s came up with similar results for Western incidences of NDEs for cardiac arrest. E.g. Greyson 2003(23%), Orne 1995(23%), Van Lommel 2001(18%).

I do find it interesting however, if you read further on,  that this article suggests that:
'The team also tested for hidden brain activity during CPR and found spikes in gamma, delta, theta, alpha and beta waves up to an hour into the resuscitation process.'

and that:
'Some of these brain waves normally occur when people are conscious and performing higher mental functions, including thinking, memory retrieval, and conscious perception'.

Seems like NDEs are a result of a physical process.

The soul is obviously connected to the body in some way through the mind and conscious processes. When death occurs it is possible that the memory of the experience gets passed on to the conscious mind through normal physical processes.  That does not necessarily mean that the entire process is purely physical or brain related.

[Enki]

The soul is obviously connected to the body in some way through the mind and conscious processes. When death occurs it is possible that the memory of the experience gets passed on to the conscious mind through normal physical processes.  That does not necessarily mean that the entire process is purely physical or brain related.

As there is plenty of evidence that the body exists and as I know of no evidence that a 'soul' exists and as there appears to be some evidence that the brain can still function to some extent during the resuscitation period, I'm sure you won't mind if I take your assertion with a pinch of salt and stick to the idea that NDEs probably have a physical explanation. 

[Sebastian Toe]

The soul is obviously connected to the body in some way through the mind and conscious processes. When death occurs it is possible that the memory of the experience .....

So what exactly is it that is experiencing the 'event'?

[Sriram]

When we communicate through computers, obviously everything that gets communicated to you has to be fed into the computer in some way....without which you cannot know of it.  That does not mean that I don't exist independent of the computer.

Think of the computer memory and display as the conscious mind and my own human mind as the soul mind.  My experiences have to necessarily get fed into the computer if it is to be conveyed to you.

The one who has the experience is me....not the computer.

[Udayana]

When we communicate through computers, obviously everything that gets communicated to you has to be fed into the computer in some way....without which you cannot know of it.  That does not mean that I don't exist independent of the computer.

Think of the computer memory and display as the conscious mind and my own human mind as the soul mind.  My experiences have to necessarily get fed into the computer if it is to be conveyed to you.

The one who has the experience is me....not the computer.

Always lovely starting the day with an infinite regress

[SteveH]

Shouldn't this thread be in 'Christian Topic', where all the boring, repetitive, never-ending threads go?

[Nearly Sane]

Shouldn't this thread be in 'Christian Topic', where all the boring, repetitive, never-ending threads go?

That would be an ecumenical matter

[SteveH]

That would be an ecumenical matter

Down with this sort of thing.

[Sriram]

NDE research is a part of science....

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Just a thought. Would atheist neuroscientists be acting correctly if they treated atheists as the control or the normal in their investigations into religion and supernatural phenomena?