Clever Corvids: using tools (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, September 01, 2015, 16:25 (3157 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: You just happen to know that corvids are intelligent and bacteria are not.
DAVID: Anyone with a brain can do a bit of thinking. Bacteria?
dhw: Isn't it amazing that experts like Margulis, Shapiro, McClintock, Albrecht-Buehler etc. never thought of that! Or could it just be that there are different forms of intelligence, and bacteria have different means of thinking? -DAVID: Pray tell, how?-We don't even understand how our own thoughts are produced (see below), so you can hardly expect me to explain how a bacterium thinks! I'm still waiting to hear how the first cells and their descendants managed to pass down divine computer programmes for billions of innovations and lifestyles over billions of years and organisms through all the random catastrophes that might have destroyed them, but that particular “how” doesn't seem to bother you.-Dhw: It's also interesting that in your correspondence with Romansh you continue to refer to NDEs as possible evidence that thought can be independent of the brain. (I'm not dismissing that argument - simply pointing out the inconsistency.) After all, if God exists, one presumes he can think, but does one also presume he has a brain?-DAVID: Not thought, but consciousness can be independent. Thought is a product of consciousness. I view consciousness as an entity all by itself, whether produced by the brain or received by the brain.-If consciousness is produced by the brain, how can it be an entity all by itself? Consciousness is not an external object but an ongoing interior process, as is thought. And if thought is a product of consciousness, then when the producer of consciousness dies, the product of consciousness should die as well. But that is precisely what NDEs contradict: the brain is dead but consciousness survives and thoughts are still produced. In that case, consciousness and thought cannot be produced by the brain. Your dualism depends on the brain being a receiver, not a producer. And if consciousness is an entity all by itself, and if animals, birds and insects have consciousness (though not on the same level as our own), why should it not be the same for bacteria?
 
I am not myself arguing for or against dualism. The “emergence” of thought from chemical interactions is another explanation - with the product being greater than the sum of its parts. But if this is so for humans, it can also be so for bacteria, even without a brain.