Free Will: Excellent discussion (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, February 18, 2015, 02:06 (3567 days ago) @ dhw


> DAVID: It still depends on how you define the limits of sentience in single-celled animals.
> 
> dhw:What depends? Shermer attributes sentience to every organism on this planet, and all the scientists I have referred to say that single cells are sentient. Evolution depends on single cells combining to form multicellular organisms. -No, I view single cells as having automatic responses to stimuli. This is all done though a series of modulated molecular reactions. Note there is no thinking involved, so the use of the word sentient is a major stretch of the meaning of sentient. Are these cells sentient? Only if one views automatic molecular reactions to stimuli as sentience. And that is what your favorite authors imply. And that is fine. I can accept that stretch of meaning if it is fully understood what the stretch is. The key is the word in your second sentence, 'multicellular'. When multicellular organisms develop a nervous system, there is a major change in how those animals can now perceive their outer world and environment. Now true sentience is present, and their responses to stimuli can be more complexly orchestrated, and they are. Note that the development of nerve cells with their special ionization processes to produce electric current over nerve fibers is an evolutionary advance which I view as almost as great a jump as the Cambrian animals themselves. Those organisms were fully dependent on the availability of the nervous system. Perhaps now you will fully understand how I view the word sentient. -From the Oxford Dictionary:
"Definition of sentient in English:
 
adjective-Able to perceive or feel things:"-And perhaps in error, I've included 'responsiveness' in my view of the word 'sentient'. The single cells show their sentience by the automatic responses they exhibit. True. The responses are automatic, without question. So how far to stretch the word which at the advanced animal level implies thoughtful responsiveness? -You are the wordsmith. So what does use of the word really tell us? Is every organism sentient? Yes, if one sticks to the strict limits of the dictionary definition. So what can you philosophize from that. Very little. Everything living can sense its outside world. It has to for survival as Shermer notes. Does this support panpsychism? Not in my view. The full meaning of the word sentient leads nowhere. And I think we have discussed this over and over, because everyone, especially including me, has shaded the meaning of the word to contain much more than it can ever imply.