On naturalism and consciousness

[Lucanus]

I think that what we are, our "soul" as you call it, is the memories we have of what we were and what we have done. It's our past experiences that shape our present; it's our knowledge of the world that, intertwined with our ancestral instincts, makes us who we are.

Really? Is that all there is to the 'soul' you think? If we thought of these memories as books at a library, wouldn't you say it feels like there's someone who in fact walks around and reads these books? Or is that just me?

I'd say it's just you as much as it is just me; I'm not qualified to give any definition of consciousness, thus what I think about that has little to no value even to me.

I think that you saying that it's impossible for "particles to be about something " is arguing from ignorance. Of course we still don't know many important things about our brain and our consciousness, but there is no evidence of anything beyond the physical realm "pulling the strings" of our sentience. Saying that "it seems impossible" simply cuts the case clear and does not add anything to what we already know.

I'm pointing to a metaphysical problem; the idea that particles can't make up ideas i.e. arrange themselves so as to be in relation to other particles in the universe as a "belief" or "thought".

But our neurons do it all the time... I don't understand why one should go out of his way and try to special plead metaphysics into existence. So far, the materialistic mindset is the one that gave us all of our understanding of the world. Why should we not even try to explain consciousness with it?

I get the feeling that you are also arguing from incredulity: you can't see how "particles can be about something", therefore it's impossible.

This topic reminds me of the time when organic chemistry was considered completely different from inorganic chemistry because most people believed it was impossible for atoms alone to form the complex lifeforms we know and postulated the existence of a "vital force" that made life itself possible. Guess what, the "vital force" didn't exist. Sometimes we like to think we are completely separated from the rest of the universe, don't we?

What I'm considering is any sort of chemistry essentially. It's simply the exercise of putting together what ever particles you like so as to create a belief about other particles in the universe. Can it be done? I don't think so.

Again, people used to think it was impossible for "particles" to be alive and to form complex life forms and came out with all sorts of concepts like the "elan vital", which have been disproven since the discovery of DNA. Can you see the analogy?

Neuroscience is working on it: http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/cours...cience.pdf