Are you taking about the idea that the complex human brain would have to have been designed by more complex beings(a higher conscious reality)?
I'm not sure, as 'designed' is such a loaded word. The most I would say is that a subjectively self-experiencing force, perhaps intrinsic to a base layer of reality, is needed to account for self-organizing systems, and the living natural world. I know that current evolutionary biology models of abiogenesis say consciousness is irrelevant (i.e. the miller-urey experiment) and all you need is chemicals, a source of energy, and the right atmospheric conditions for life to emerge. But one of their hidden assumptions is that electrons, photons, gluons, electromagnetic forces, chemical reactions, are 100% blind, phenomenologically dead, have a experiential awareness of zero. I don't think this assumption is justified.
Also, I don't rule out the idea that because dna coding determining protein sequences is so complex, and that it 'only' took a billion years or so for the first life forms to emerge (prokaryotes), this suggests that some kind of 'intelligence' may have got it started. Maybe advanced aliens, or maybe some incomprehensible transcendent cognitive force, who knows.
The physicist jeremy england thinks he may have the answer with 'dissipation-driven adaptation', the idea that in the right conditions molecules can spontaneously self-organize to metabolize energy and dissipate it more efficiently. But this doesn't explain why molecules would have this potential to self-organize in the first place, or what possible benefit could be gained from a blindly self-sustaining process of increasing complexity through iterative algorithms.
When you said axiomatic to conscious experience: Does composition mean wave form or something? I've read about the double slit theory and how the photon split into a quantum entangled photon pair, then was monitored. They found that if it was observed, it acted as a particle. If not, it acted as a waveform. So I thought that was interesting.
I don't think it necessarily means wave form. Composition could just mean that each conscious experience is made up of distinctions which are embedded within each other, e.g. a circle, the color purple, upward not downwards, a purple circle, a purple circle located upwards etc.
Yes, I know the double slit experiment. Maybe consciousness acts to compose a pre-observed wave-reality into discrete states, effectively collapsing the wave function. Although I know that 'observation' in quantum mechanics doesn't necessarily mean the observation has to be a conscious experience.
Have you thought about the possibility that probability doesn't exist? It's an illusion, but everything, including rolling the dice, is already determined? Just another weird thought i have.
Yes. There could be hidden variables in quantum mechanics corresponding to subatomic particles which we haven't detected yet, which would eliminate the indeterminacy and uncertainty we currently ascribe to that level of reality.
Einstein may have been right all along.
When it come to classical physics, there is no such thing as probability in the world. You are correct.
Probability is a function of human ignorance, of a deficient epistemology.
For example, if we knew everything about a dice and the initial conditions in which someone rolled it, its weight, exact size, everything about the force that rolled it, everything about the atmospheric conditions in which the roll took place, air resistance etc, and everything about the object onto which it was rolled, accounting for friction etc, then we would be able to predict with 100% certainty what number it would land on.
This is all better described by 'laplace's demon' : "An intellect which at a certain moment would know all forces that set nature in motion, and all positions of all items of which nature is composed, if this intellect were also vast enough to submit these data to analysis, it would embrace in a single formula the movements of the greatest bodies of the universe and those of the tiniest atom; for such an intellect nothing would be uncertain and the future just like the past would be present before its eyes."
Do you mean that you think consciousness may hold matter together, like gluons? What do you mean?
I think that's what max planck was suggesting yes.
What I've found is that many of the great theoretical and particle physicists of the 20th century weren't dogmatic materialists because they were humble enough to realize that they didn't really know what 'matter' is, and that at the base level of what can be known matter sort of evaporates to be replaced by information and ideas and symmetries.
This quote from heisenberg: "Modern physics has definitely decided in favor of Plato. In fact the smallest units of matter are not physical objects in the ordinary sense; they are forms, ideas which can be expressed unambiguously only in mathematical language."
So when people today say that consciousness is reducible to material brain states, what they don't seem to take into account is the fact that behind brain states at base reality is a world of form, idea, information, number, and 'matter' is nowhere to be found.
Then there are interesting questions such as 'where did this basic information of forms and ideas originate?', 'is it being thought by something?' etc.
Sorry, I'm not nearly as smart or advanced as you.
Why do you say that?
I'm not that smart, I just enjoy discussing things like this.
I'm not an authority on anything.
