Beginnings

[genkaus]

You know how everyone is always telling me I need to learn more science? Well, ok. But some of you really need to learn more about epistemology. I think you'd figure out why your point is silly if you even just read a wikipedia entry on what epistemology even is.

Your sentence would be better if it said "there is no evidence that is accepted by modern science" or "there is no evidence or rationale that me and my friends like." There is tons (and tons and tons and tons) of evidence. If you've bothered to investigate, the most truthful thing you could say is "I don't like the evidence", not "there is no evidence." Really important difference. Otherwise you're locked in a weird dogma where you assume only modern science produces truth (although modern science can't prove that only modern science produces truth).

The real point is that science simply can't help with these questions.

Why don't you try studying some epistemology yourself? That branch of philosophy does not give any evidence on the form and nature of existence of consciousness. In fact, it simply takes consciousness as a given and goes from there.

Further, science can and does help with questions regarding consciousness. A lot of details about how consciousness works have, in fact, been revealed by science. You really should study it.

If you've got consciousness in your final product, it must have been in the original list of ingredients.

That's where you show your embarrassing ignorance of both science and cooking. Ingredients combine, break-down and react in all sorts of manner, such that the stuff you find in your final product may not be anywhere to be found in your ingredients.

To use your own analogy, the taste and flavor you find in the finished chocolate cake cannot be found in the ingredients. It is only when they are mixed and combined in a particular manner that those characteristics emerge. Similarly, consciousness is an emergent property of complex structures that does not exist in original ingredients.

Where did the Big Bang come from? And what banged out of that thing, anyway?

The fact that you'd even make a statement like that shows how pathetically ignorant you are.

---

I just want to thank you for posting the only reasonable response to this point. Whether I agree with it or not, at least it makes sense!

Maybe your point is true, maybe not. Do models of the origin of the universe prove that consciousness didn't exist for a significant early portion of it, or are they based on that assumption?

Try and follow this simple logic:

1. Any and all consciousness we know of exists as a result of complex biological systems. No consciousness has ever been observed in anything other than those systems.

2. We know that these systems did not exist for a significant portion of the universe's history.

3. Therefore, there is no reason to assume that cosnsciousness existed in those parts either.