Panpsychism (Evolution)

by hyjyljyj , Tuesday, December 11, 2012, 16:53 (4364 days ago) @ dhw
edited by unknown, Tuesday, December 11, 2012, 17:06

My 2¢-I, too, find it impossible to engage meaningfully in any discussion wherein our own consciousness is questioned or doubted; it feels like the revocation of our license to question or doubt things, including said consciousness. The circle is a pleasing shape in general, but not as regards logic. -This is almost the René Descartes undying classic "Cogito, ergo sum," where my thinking logically requires my existence: in the land where words mean things, doubting something entails the a priori consciousness of what is being doubted. In fact it seems to go even deeper, since I MIGHT really not exist but only be imagined to exist by some other mind; however, can I REALLY not be conscious, if I'm either really considering or imagining I'm considering the question of whether I'm conscious? Am I supposed to accept the possibility that some other mind may be imagining that my mind is doubting my consciousness? And if so, how would I be conscious of accepting that possibility--is that being imagined for me, too? Moreover, how could my so-called acceptance or rejection of the possibility have any validity, if I'm not really even conscious of the two options in the first place and am, therefore, unable to deliberate between them? Anyway, if it's OK for the mind of this hypothetical grand imaginer to have consciousness, why not my own? The questions possess the thought-destroying potential of koans.-I wouldn't necessarily go as far as labeling someone who does undertake to question their own consciousness as being on the "epistemological high horse", regardless of how catchy I might find that phrase--that is, unless they stubbornly stick to it in an apparent gambit to look hip or to effectively make the discussion difficult or impossible. What would be the point? -We're all conscious of having better things to do.