# Consciousness...Part Two! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 19, 2015, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consciousness-part-two/710240 "2015-01-19T01:17:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2016, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consciousness-part-two/710240/61 "2016-06-06T04:55:41Z")
> [@Biffster](#): > > What I’m suggesting is that I think consciousness is consciousness, in the same way fire is fire, water is water, electricity is electricity, and magnetism is magnetism. We experience the illusion of separateness when it comes to consciousness, but ultimately we are all part of one and the same consciousness. The internet would be the closest analogy I can think of at the moment: it is a repository for the collective thoughts, musings, emotions, wisdom and whatnot of mankind, and we all contribute to it in our own small way. It’s like the Borg collective, but with a sense of humour. I suspect that the consciousness that is you is the same consciousness that is me. It is not two separate consciousnesses. That is why we are able to communicate; we find a similar wave length and then riff on that for a while. . . . I think most of this is nonsense; it’s all new-agey and doesn’t really say anything. Now that I’ve insulted you, there is a way in which you are correct: human consciousness is socially directed. We evolved as a social animal, and a great deal of our consciousness is focused on other people’s thoughts. One of the very earliest things a baby learns is when someone else is looking at them. We go on from there. Our consciousness has a group purpose. One person, totally alone, will lack much of the functional use of his consciousness. (As in the movie, he might very well end up talking to a volleyball in order to mimic sanity.) But, no, consciousness is not a “thing” like fire, water, electricity, or magnetism. It’s simply a function of a very complex brain, with parts of the brain observing other parts of the brain. Primitive animals suffer pain; mammals are complex enough to be aware of their own pain; humans are complex enough to seek it out in small doses, such as devouring really hot and spicy foods. Consciousness is a little like music: it’s just something we humans do with our brains. You wouldn’t say that music is a “thing” like water or magnetism. It’s just a complex suite of behaviors. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2016, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consciousness-part-two/710240/62 "2016-06-06T07:16:08Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I think most of this is nonsense; it’s all new-agey and doesn’t really say anything. > > Now that I’ve insulted you, there is a way in which you are correct: human consciousness is socially directed. We evolved as a social animal, and a great deal of our consciousness is focused on other people’s thoughts. One of the very earliest things a baby learns is when someone else is looking at them. We go on from there. Our consciousness has a group purpose. > > One person, totally alone, will lack much of the functional use of his consciousness. (As in the movie, he might very well end up talking to a volleyball in order to mimic sanity.) > > But, no, consciousness is not a “thing” like fire, water, electricity, or magnetism. It’s simply a function of a very complex brain, with parts of the brain observing other parts of the brain. Primitive animals suffer pain; mammals are complex enough to be aware of their own pain; humans are complex enough to seek it out in small doses, such as devouring really hot and spicy foods. > > Consciousness is a little like music: it’s just something we humans do with our brains. You wouldn’t say that music is a “thing” like water or magnetism. It’s just a complex suite of behaviors. Thanks for the reply. I don’t quite agree, obviously, but that’s okay. What I’m talking about is more metaphysical. With respect to music, I’m not so sure music is only relegated to humans. If one considers all sounds to be a form of music, from whale calls to wind chimes, then it may not be such a human-centric thing after all. It’s just that we recognize the patterns in nature as music and reproduce them creatively, but there could be an argument made that music represents a consciousness unto itself. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2016, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consciousness-part-two/710240/63 "2016-06-06T19:55:30Z")
Agreed that other animals may create music. Disagree that music is a “consciousness unto itself.” What is the mechanism of awareness? How does a C-Major chord, whether made by me on a piano or by the wind whistling through the pines, know what it’s doing? The big problem with mysticism like this is that there is no possible way to test it. Let’s claim that the Sun is conscious. Okay: ask it a question. No answer… An ever bigger problem with mysticism like this is that the terms aren’t even defined clearly. What does “a consciousness unto itself” even mean? What is the model you’re proposing? ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2016, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consciousness-part-two/710240/64 "2016-06-07T01:48:55Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Agreed that other animals may create music. > > Disagree that music is a “consciousness unto itself.” What is the mechanism of awareness? How does a C-Major chord, whether made by me on a piano or by the wind whistling through the pines, know what it’s doing? > > The big problem with mysticism like this is that there is no possible way to test it. Let’s claim that the Sun is conscious. Okay: ask it a question. No answer… > > An ever bigger problem with mysticism like this is that the terms aren’t even defined clearly. What does “a consciousness unto itself” even mean? What is the model you’re proposing? Good questions. If consciousness means “self awareness,” then that’s a tough thing to prove. If consciousness is more like “existence,” then that’s another thing altogether. Is the human fetus aware that it is a fetus? How about the newborn baby? The toddler? And yet at some point, humans do possess a consciousness. So a simple “Ask it a question” as a measuring device falls short. Perhaps it doesn’t speak your language. I’m not sure what the model I’m proposing is, but I think it may have something to do with intuition. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/consciousness-part-two/710240.md?page=3)