RE: Theory number 3.
October 29, 2012 at 12:15 am
(This post was last modified: October 29, 2012 at 12:28 am by genkaus.)
(October 28, 2012 at 10:57 am)MysticKnight Wrote: Well there would have to be logically a lot of steps (perhaps millions) to get to consciousness from unconsciousness. But at the same time, there has to be a point where it's actually conscious as opposed to not. But before that, it's not conscious. So there has to millions of steps but at the same time, there has to be but one step as well. Hence you have the problem.
Actually, this is where you have a problem. Since consciousness can - at its simplest - be defined as awareness to surroundings indicated by a stimulus-response process, we see that the distinction between conscious and unconscious isn't a single step but a thousand steps as well.
When you are cut, your blood responds by clotting. Does your blood have a separate consciousness of its own? What about your immune system, which responds to infection? What about the micro-organisms that attacked your body?
What about the Venus Flytrap which eats insects? Is it conscious or not? What about the Sunflower which constantly turns to face the sun?
Would you say all these things have consciousness?
(October 28, 2012 at 10:57 am)MysticKnight Wrote: This is non-sequitur, if consciousness is solely created by biological/physical, it doesn't mean evolution was capable of producing it.
Learn some logic. That is exactly what it means.
(October 28, 2012 at 12:17 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: What I mean by physical/biological, is that if we had no soul, it doesn't mean necessarily that consciousness could have arisen from evolution process.
Not necessarily - but we are conscious, so it did.