Loving the evolution of the podcast Lex. Keep experimenting and find your way,(reply>), I’m sure your sage advice was deeply appreciated by Lex,(reply>), @Dahir Hussein There are some good criticisms here, but mostly easy to respond to: I think the private subjectivity of human consciousness can be conceived of in terms of self-enclosing and self-organizing systems, along with the workings of memory, which is crucial to much of what we can say about consciousness as we experience it... there may be no evidence of "consciousness"* outside our own - but this argument points only to our limited access. <br><br>*Apparently defined ad hoc as something human-like, in these arguments.<br><br>There's also no evidence of anything substantially different from qualitative experience, so shouldn't we propose, by parsimony, that the substantial nature of things we cannot access is of a kind with the things we can? Now, the combination problem is the most difficult to deal with, imo, as we really have no idea of how we might measure conscious properties or build new conscious experiences out of other, unmeasured building blocks that are presumably wholly unlike our own. These criticisms are why I rather prefer "everything is consciousNESS" to "everything is conscious", i.e. I prefer an idealist view that allows for private points of view and intersubjective consistency, like Bernardo Kastrup's or Donald Hoffman's.,(reply>)," ‘Everything is conscious’: Panpsychism<br>162<br>Panpsychism is somewhat similar to property dualism"," which asserts<br>that one substance exists (physical substance)"," but contains two<br>properties (physical and non-physical or subjective conscious<br>properties). Panpsychism asserts that matter contains a form of<br>subjective consciousness. From this perspective"," it argues that<br>consciousness is an intrinsic property of the universe and it plays a<br>causal role. Advocates of panpsychism include professors David<br>Chalmers and Thomas Nagel. Since each component of matter<br>contains consciousness"," the brain’s consciousness is just an<br>accumulation of these components of consciousness. One form of<br>panpsychism states that all matter is conscious in the same way<br>humans are. The other form of panpsychism asserts that consciousness<br>contained in matter is in a basic state"," also known as<br>protoconsciousness.<br>There are a number of problems with panpsychism.<br>• Firstly"," there is an absence of evidence for the claim that<br>matter contains subjective consciousness. Protons","<br>electrons"," quarks and atoms do not exhibit any signs of<br>having subjective consciousness.234<br>• Secondly"," this approach fails to provide an adequate<br>metaphysical or physical explanation of how matter<br>contains consciousness. Where did the property of<br>consciousness come from? How does matter contain this<br>subjective conscious property? The panpsychist’s failure<br>to answer these questions undermines any metaphysical<br>and physical explanation.<br>• Thirdly"," there are no examples of consciousness existing<br>outside of the subjective experience of a living entity. For<br>instance"," what does pain mean without a self or an ‘I’?<br>What does being conscious of a thought mean without<br>someone who is thinking? These questions strongly<br>163<br>suggest that consciousness only makes sense with a<br>unified conscious being experiencing an array of<br>subjective states.<br>• Finally"," how can a unified conscious experience emerge<br>from many pieces of matter that all contain a form of<br>consciousness? How do individual pieces of matter that<br>contain subjective consciousness manage to add up to a<br>meaningful"," unified experience? If our conscious<br>experiences were just a result of many conscious elements<br>contained in the physical parts that make up the brain"," our<br>experience would be incoherent"," or less unified. Professor<br>Edward Feser comments on the unified meaning of a<br>single conscious experience. He explains that our<br>experiences are not just a summation of many different<br>conscious elements; our experiences have a unified feel.<br>He presents his case using the conscious experience of<br>reading a book:<br>“The experience has a coherent significance or meaning"," and<br>significance or meaning for a single subject of experience. You<br>are not only aware of the shape", texture, colors," etc. as separate<br>elements"," but are aware of them as a book; and it is you who<br>are aware of them"," rather than myriad neural events somehow<br>each being ‘aware’ of one particular aspect of the book.”<br>235<br>There is a lot of academic discussion around the approaches I<br>have summarised above. However"," the main intention was to briefly<br>introduce these approaches and bring to light some criticisms which<br>undermine their ability to explain subjective consciousness as<br>sufficiently as theism does.",(reply>), Yeah I like the new intro with highlights of what's to come in the conversation,(reply>), You give the talks to everyone who has checked into your personal Hilbert Hotel. 😉