Pansychism (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, October 02, 2013, 17:52 (4070 days ago) @ George Jelliss

GEORGE: Panpsychism is just silly. It's like the old 'elan vital' concept of things being live because they contain the spark of life, or like the old homunculus theory of heredity. These are 'explanations' that explain nothing. -DAVID: I'm in full agreement.-GEORGE: Chemistry and Genetics have successfully explained the nature of life and heredity in terms of atoms, molecules and energy, and similar 'reductionist' explanations of mind and consciousness are well on the way.-I'm not sure what you mean by the "nature of life". Scientists have broken organisms down into their component parts, given them all names, and found out how these parts interact. But science has not discovered what it is that transforms inanimate matter into a living organism, and the claim that science is "well on the way" to explaining mind and consciousness will only carry weight if science actually gets there. Until it does, your "explanation" is a matter of faith in materialism and in the ability of chance to put together the first living, self-replicating organisms.
 
David's God explains how we got here, but substitutes the incomprehensible mystery of how first cause energy acquired infinitely greater powers than we have ourselves. The form of panpsychism that I have been suggesting explains how we got here, i.e. via consciousness evolving within matter, and can accommodate or dispense with God. Just like the other two approaches, however, it cannot explain how energy produces life and consciousness. It therefore seems to me that all three hypotheses are partial explanations which ultimately rely heavily on faith. If one is silly, they're all silly.