More miscellany Parts One & Two (Evolution)

by dhw, Wednesday, October 30, 2024, 12:26 (22 days ago) @ dhw

Again, I’ve combined David’s posts under “More miscellany”, but there has been no answer to yesterday’s “evolution” and “miscellany” posts. No problem in itself, so long as there is no problem at David’s end. (There was a simple explanation last time.)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Is there consciousness in fetus?

QUOTE: "Of course, any discussion of fetal consciousness remains highly speculative. Based on the evidence so far, I predict that the light of consciousness shines from sometime near birth – if not a bit earlier – until death. It’s also unlikely that consciousness emerges all at once. Yet, even if its emergence is gradual, there must be a moment when its first spark ignites, like the first photon of light radiating from a lightbulb as its analogue dial is turned upward."

I’m afraid this made me laugh out loud. So much detailed scientific research, ending with conclusions that require no scientific research at all. Yep, consciousness must begin at some time, and must develop as the brain develops and there are more and more things to be conscious of, and it lasts until death. Gimme the Nobel!

Far more interesting are David’s comments:

DAVID: a jumble of sensory signals can be imagined, but at what point does a fetus or young child become aware that he is aware, a true definition of consciousness.

Most dictionary definitions would agree with you, along the lines of “awareness of one’s thoughts and surroundings”, but I would dispute this. Self-awareness seems to me to be the ultimate level of consciousness, and this is what may lie behind your opposition to the concept of cellular intelligence. There can be no doubt that even the simplest of life forms are aware of their environment – otherwise how would they obtain food, and protect themselves against threats to their existence? But awareness of being aware takes us way beyond that level. Ultimately, in us humans, it leads to self-analysis, questioning our own perceptions, and even imagining realities beyond those we experience directly. A “true” definition in my view would be “awareness”, not “awareness of awareness”, but then what’s the definition of “awareness”? I like the comment in the Oxford Companion to Philosophy: “Consciousness exists, but it resists definition. There are some criteria for saying of some organism or state that it is conscious.” (It goes on to examine various philosophical approaches to the subject.)

DAVID: Based upon NDE reports, consciousness can separate from the brain and return to it. This means a material brain creates an immaterial consciousness which becomes a separate entity. In religious thought it is a soul which can live for eternity. At this point we have left factual knowledge and entered the realm of belief and faith.

I really like this summary. It represents a kind of compromise between materialism and dualism, but you have presented it with admirable neutrality! Thank you.

Moroccan fossils

QUOTES: "The findings fill a crucial gap in the human fossil record.”

“'Three hundred thousand years ago, there is fossil evidence of a population that in a remarkable number of ways resembles modern humans, and you can make of that what you like,” says Wood.

DAVID: An earlier report was presented here giving the 315,000 year's ago dating, with the statement the fossils were H sapiens.

The usual sensational new discovery which here fills a crucial gap, although you can make of it what you like. So what crucial gap does it fill? It’s pretty obvious that different hominins and homos appeared in different environments. Even today we can see that sapiens have appeared with different racial characteristics, again depending on which part of the world they inhabit or once inhabited. Variations and changing dates don’t fill crucial gaps!