Roy Baumeister - Why Did Consciousness Emerge?

There was a time when there was no consciousness in our universe. Now there is. What caused consciousness to emerge? Did consciousness develop in the same way that, say, the liver or the eye developed, by random mutation and fitness selection during evolution? Inner experience seems to be radically different from anything else. Are we fooling ourselves?
Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Support the show with Closer To Truth merchandise: bit.ly/3P2ogje
Watch more interviews on consciousness: bit.ly/3VMBX7J
Roy F. Baumeister is Francis Eppes Professor of Psychology at Florida State University in Tallahassee, Florida. He is a social psychologist who is known for his work on the self, social rejection, belongingness, sexuality, self-control, self-esteem, self-defeating behaviors, motivation, aggression, consciousness, and free will.
Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[@kenhtinhthuc]

The definition of sleepwalker as a "person who gets out of bed and walks around while they are sleeping" proves that many actions including speaking can be taken without us being conscious.

[@highvalence7649]

The sleep walker might still be phenomenally conscious, meaning they might still experience, but just not be reflectively aware of what they are experiencing or doing.

[@fullyawakened]

sleepwalking is not an indication that a philosophical zombie could ever be a real thing. it's a fantasy, a nonsense idea. just something people go "what if...." about but there is no reason to believe any of it.

[@nyworker]

But can you learn to walk without being conscious,?

[@sharmitoboylos7585]

love this stuff and thank Robert his guests and crew for presenting these colloquys to us

[@JavierTijuana]

Consciousness is just being aware that there is a voice inside who communicates with itself. Who or what communicates with who/what (if the voice is the I or the I is what is conscious of the voice) is another matter.

[@basvanelburg744]

7'00": plants don't do that much, says Baumeister. However, trees do communicate with each other, on a chemical level via roots and fungi, etc. In this way they sense threats, shortages, etc. Consciousness may arise already at that chemical level (provided it involves an evolutionary advantage).

[@jwaynes71]

love his explanation, and able to deduce consciousness vs un-unconsciousness, yet very humble on the "hard problem of consciousness of how it inanimate physical things can produce subjective experience"

[@MegaDonaldification]

Mr or Prof. Roy B understands the scope of patience within oneself and reliving kindness via communication with fellow beings and communion with the universe according to your tradition and culture. I like the way you think, Mr Roy. If you really understand why being conscious of what you say matters, particularly especially when you engage in a fasting routine with no food and water only depending on your kindness patience and walk under during the day and night, you will respect really powerful beings starting with the patient due pregnant woman, monks, magical beings in general who attained high spiritual super consciousness. There are people out there that will run away from you especially if they know you are troublesome to the extent where you might do something so foolish that the karma will destroy you and the persons by your side - some of these people are the people you call broken, poor or unintelligent folks - if these same people open their mouths against you or think of you with certain daily routine of sheer torment to themselves, if you knew you will regret crossing paths with them. Humans are not ordinary. It is a great thing you found and had a great moment with Mr/Prof. Roy Baumeister. Remain blessed in Insight, Wisdom and Tenacity.

[@vm-bz1cd]

once again the wrong question: Consciousness did not "emerge"... it is the ONLY thing we are CERTAIN OF... everything else we experience as Reality "emerges" from Consciousness.

[@corkeymonster]

Exactly, it's like thinking the radio DJ is inside your radio. The "physical" universe is a subset of the larger consciousness system. Materialists won't ever figure this out on their own.

[@quantumkath]

Roy Baumeister. You are a central reason why I watch Closer To Truth!

[@llxqzs]

it’s just weird to think that I am the only perspective I know of, the universe decided to view itself from...

[@ingenuity168]

This is the best explanation I've heard so far. 👏

[@mikefinn]

Thank you again. This insight of brain developement evolving from hand signaling and communicating that improved species survival chances seems spot on.

[@francesco5581]

I think that the main quality (by far) of consciousness is self awareness... if that was his purpose or not its up to each one to decide

[@antimaterialworld2717]

He mentioned nice idea in the beggining, that consciousness is how we relate to each other. So ultimately consciousness is how God relate to us and vice verse.

[@francesco5581]

@@antimaterialworld2717 that is an interesting interpretation

[@antimaterialworld2717]

@@francesco5581 more elaborated version: "OBSERVATION CAUSES WAWE FUNCTION TO COLLAPSE", "CONSCIOUSNESS CREATES REALITY".."THE SECRET" ... Those are not contemporary ideas which are going to be solved by empiric science as many are thinking they will. It is always there, this Hard problem of consciousness: "If consciousness creates reality, then why it is not working all the time and why is brick-wall so hard?" Well, because you are not alone. If one person want sunny wheater and another rainy? What to do? Solution is there, as answered by ancient saints. This is small sample from various revealed scriptures as summed by Bhaktivinode Thakur: tad-Iksanac chaktir eva kriyavati The Lord's glance pushes His potency into action. In the Prasna Upanisad (6.3) it is said: sa Iksam cakre "He glanced over the material creation."* In the Aitareya Upanisad (1.1.1-2) it is said: sa aiksata lokan nu srja iti. sa iman lokan asrjata. "He glanced over the material creation. Thus He created the entire material world."* In the Vamana Purana it is said: tatra tatra sthito visnus tat-tac-chaktih prabodhayan eka eva maha-saktih kurute sarvam anjasa "Wherever Lord Visnu goes, His potencies follow. The master of great potencies, He does everything very easily." In the Bhagavad-gita (9.10), Lord Krsna explains: mayadhyaksena prakrtih suyate sa-caracaram hetunanena kaunteya jagad viparivartate "This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction, 0 son of Kunti, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again."* Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu explains: sakti pradhana krsna icchaya sarvam karta "Lord Krsna wishes, and His potency does everything." Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu again explains (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya 20.259): maya-dvare srje tenho brahmandera gana jada-rupa prakrti nahe brahmanda-karana "By the agency of the material energy, this same Lord Sankarsana creates all the universes. The dull material energy, known in modern language as nature, is not the cause of the material universe."*

[@markberman6708]

Expecting another great episode, will watch later. Has anyone questioned if it's obvious that, once our rock stabilized the second generation of life evolved- consciousness within beings capable of doing something with it. 2nd Gen development within a universe that does actually make sense and has a progressional order to it?

[@bobtarmac1828]

ANS: to ask itself these questions.

[@S3RAVA3LM]

CTT, could you interview Deirdre Carabine, concering Negative Theology and here book, 'The Unknown God'.

[@ififif31]

Computers communicate with each other very nicely and without apparantly being concious.

[@mikefinn]

Have you ever seen a computer signal to another computer, "danger, run up that tree or your going to get unplugged"?

[@ififif31]

@@mikefinn So does that mean that computers don't communicate then? :) Also note that there are plenty of concious solitary animals that can climb trees to escape danger without any need for communication by their own species :)

[@mikefinn]

@@ififif31 I think you missed several points in the presentation. First, computers are not the subject as they do not have consciousness. Second, there are many examples of unintentional signals going from one member of a colony, flock, herd when that first one alerts to danger. They all run or fly away. This is communication at the first level above a computers' communication level. When specific information, a hand signal, says go up the tree or into the hole, that is a much higher level of communication and this ability has been selected by the evolutionary process. The brain enlarged slowly (by natutal selection) as the information load increased. Computers may never evolve consciousness because there is no survival pressure on them to do so.

[@jonstewart464]

I don't think it's all that clear that computers do communicate with each other. Sure, we see it that way, because they represent information which has meaning to us - John Searle would say the communication is "observer relative". From a computer's perspective, it isn't communicating anything - it doesn't have a perspective, it's just a load of physical material changing states through time. I think Roy's onto something with this social role of consciousness. An organism has goals, and some information is salient to those goals. In a social species, these goals coincide, creating a need to communicate information with shared salience. I think it's logically possible that this could all happen without consciousness, but maybe consciousness is evolution's elegant solution to this problem of complex information processing? Social communication might just be an example of where relatively rich consciousness comes in handy - simpler consciousness might be the elegant solution for simpler non-social organisms that just have to do a lot of monitoring of their internal states in a dynamic environment. I don't think consciousness is strictly necessary for navigating the world or social interaction, but I suspect it's a neat trick that evolution came up with that made creatures that had it a hell of a lot more effective.

[@LuigiSimoncini]

yes Israel, and if they would be able to reproduce and be subjected to evolutionary pressure they would probably develop consciousness, as we did

[@movazi]

Maybe consciousness evolved along with the development of language. And language evolved because of human awareness of what we call Time (a uniquely human trait).

[@antimaterialworld2717]

effect must be present in cause. consciousness is not emergent phenomena.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

can computers do any logical reasoning? which might be conscious if can do logical reasoning? or are computers programmed to do logical reasoning by conscious subjects?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

consciousness for subjects to relate causation?

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

Survival. It creates more relevance in survival. Thats why when you sleep your are not in survival mode but in sub conscious state. Its actually a function of survival to sleep as it restores energy. All elaborate constructs or extensions including the abstract version of survival like consciousness are constructs to and for the ability to survive or are attributes of the survival disposition found in matter. Survival participation of consciousness helps one survive or is basically the mode of being to survive. Survival formation from material matter transformed into abstraction via the brain and its complexity.

[@markpmar0356]

Excellent. Another (evolutionary) use for consciousness: awareness of the environment for self-preservation. To recognize danger. Also, what is "intuition"?

[@mojoomla]

and why would an unconcious thing want self-preservation please ? If it knew that it existed as a self worthy of preservation, it would already be conscious !

[@chrisbennett6260]

Pricesly

[@fortynine3225]

We are up to our neck in intuition....

[@markpmar0356]

@@mojoomla"Unconscious" means "not awake" in its basic form. You would not know of imminent danger if you were unconscious.

[@mikefinn]

I think intuition ties to genetic "memory" or genetic imprinting. Though, it might be that thoughts radiate through time and a "receiver" tuned to the exact same circumstances picks them up.

[@timwoodruff7984]

YEAHBUT- if consciousness arose to help humans plan and communicate better, how do you count for it in lower animals, like a shrimp?

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

Being conscious probably evolved as a side effect of human culture which needed civilized members to more effectively coordinate behavior as doing so increased the odds of individual survival and replication and thereby enabled civilization to grow even larger, all this perfectly in line with the way evolution works.

[@bretnetherton9273]

Awareness is the ONLY constant of ALL experience what could be more fundamental to reality than that?

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

What consciousness is is the disposition of survival at a higher level of existence or its the disposition of survival being realised as an abstract composition giving it higher relevance in survival of itself in its environment. Without it survival is less relevant and evolution is stifled.

[@Novastar.SaberCombat]

Reflection is key. Frequencies reveal wisdom. Resonance offers clarity. But what is beyond the combination of all three has no word nor definition in any language of humanity's creation. 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ "Before I start, I must see my end. Destination known, my mind's journey now begins. Upon my chariot, heart and soul's fate revealed. In Time, all points converge; hope's strength, resteeled. But to earn final peace at the universe's endless refrain, we must see all in nothingness... before we start again." 🐲✨🐲✨🐲✨ --Diamond Dragons (series)

[@Rareme530]

Could you explain the first part?

[@rewattasusima5457]

This knowledge come from unthinking , if you use thinking you will not meet answer. Take strong your consciousness and look back your mind try to observe how it’s work. very easy and simply but you must do since wake up until sleep your consciousness so develop.( don’t forget thinking is illusion) important try to see thinking is your thinking or thinking it can think by itself.

[@SingularSolarus]

Truly Excellent talk. Roy is right on!

[@LuigiSimoncini]

what a relief, somebody looking at reasonable and scientifc arguments instead of the usual panpsychism, duality or quantum babbling

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

If you resonated with what he said then you would very likely be tickled pink while reading Julian Jaynes' great book, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind".

[@antimaterialworld2717]

well, looking at reasonable arguments implies observer.

[@LuigiSimoncini]

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL I read that book many years ago, thanks

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

@@LuigiSimoncini Aha, why I found your comment to be so reasonable no doubt. Cheers!

[@stanh24]

Best explanation of the function of consciousness I’ve heard yet!

[@santamariajorge]

Though basic and indispensable, I don´t see consciousness as the last step in evolution. What really gave us the edge over the rest of the animals, was abstract thinking AND a timeline which allowed us to plan ahead. It also gave us the angst of death. Of course you have to be conscious for all this but it is only a prerequisit, in my opinion.

[@gert8439]

Neural correlation suggests there's nothing which can be experienced consciously which can't be done unconsciously, including symbolic language.

[@chrisbennett6260]

Is that so says who

[@chrisbennett6260]

You can say and think what you want to think of course

[@fortynine3225]

The unconscious is not rational..so it cannot do ''rational''.

[@neffetSnnamremmiZ]

Historic perspective is an unprovable metaphysical perspective! We don't know if there would be something without the conscious mind..

[@chrisbennett6260]

How exactly can these experts in their field prove otherwise

[@CesarClouds]

Plants react to sunlight without being conscious.

[@johnayres2303]

Some animals can recognise their own reflection, is that a step towards consciousness?

[@MasterofOne-zl6ur]

What one must try and understand is why a dinosaur has consciousness and when or what was the first constituent to obtain consciousness what it is its function or purpose or use when its applied to survival. I like using the dinosaur because its historically true and it puts things in perspective, plus it confirms the conscious agent rather than soul or spirit and is a better classification or definition to use. As dinosaur would then after death or complete consciousness loss reside into heaven also and continue or partake in survival of conscious agent into the afterlife if it is so. The only way a dinosaur agent which is conscious could extend into heaven is if the conscious agent of the dinosaur was able to go also.

[@jareknowak8712]

👍

[@ricklanders]

Consciousness is not cognition!

[@davidhunt313]

How could _pain_ ever be perceived if there were no *_consciousness!!?!_*

[@ricklanders]

The unconscious is conscious, just not of itself.

[@Jeri-Walk]

It can't become and grow on its own and capture and store and interact with the most complex database ever known to the world. Surely there is a sign for those who ponder

[@hamdaniyusuf_dani]

You can't have satisfactory answer about consciousness before you can define it properly.

[@tunahelpa5433]

Mr Baumeister is describing functions of the prefrontal cortex as though it was consciousness. It is not. Rather, consciousness emerges in it. Correlation is not causation.

[@tunahelpa5433]

Actually, I agree with the conclusion - that consciousness emerged at some point in the evolution of animals, and that evolutionary selection has allowed greater and greater functionality over time. So we kind of agree. It's just that he didn't provide any meaningful support for his unprovable hypothesis that consciousness is required for these functions (which I agree, as I said). So thats not a very scientific way to present one's case. Maybe he's a philosopher, not a scientist. Phosophers do that sort of thing all the time

[@themanwhosoldtheworld5350]

But functionalist theories of consciousness account for the justification given by Baumeister for the need for consciousness in social interaction. All the more reason why those interested in the topic of consciousness really should have training/education in philosophy of mind.

[@danielkammer3244]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

[@highvalence7649]

...through him all things were made.

[@danielkammer3244]

"The word" contains information and consciousness. You can replace "the word " with consciousness and still makes sense

[@joegibbskins]

His argument would make all animals that don’t communicate unconscious and any machine able to communicate with other machines conscious. Maybe that’s true, but I somehow doubt it

[@LuigiSimoncini]

why? I heard him saying that animals are conscious, just a different (less sophisticated) kind of consciousness. The point about computers and communication has nothing to do with consciousness, unless computers could go through evolutionary processes as we did, maybe listen again

[@joegibbskins]

@@LuigiSimoncini yeah I made that comment before the video ended. That’s egg on my face, although that detail kind of undercuts the consciousness is evolutionarily selected for communicating argument. It’s an interesting point on its own, but it weirdly moved the goal posts by just subdividing what people were already talking about

[@LuigiSimoncini]

@@joegibbskins chicken and egg, as always with evolution

[@RuneRelic]

More to the point is the denial that consciousness has any effect on the evolution and function of physical matter. Even when the most obvious examples of babies having zero motor control that needs to develop through trial and error (aka practice). Even when the subconscious mind needs to execute the same method of trial and error in the womb to get the autonomous system functional before birth. The purpose of consciousness to me, is to use a device/vessel to alter 'physical' reality (aka spacetime). Yet bearing in mind few if any can consult with their subsconscious mind, that controls the autonomous system and initiates dream/nightmares as a form of dialogue, to me that shows dual minds in one body. So if the conscious we have, has no control over that subconscious mind.....who/what does.....angels/demons ? Hence, to me we are simply autonomous drones. The eyes/ears/taste/touch/smell sensors of an alternative indentity that can not be in more than two places at once, but can access those memories/senses. Memories being essential if you can not access two bodies at the same time. As you cant be in two places at one time....how can a shared conscious share thoughts between others that cant be shared at a 'conscious' level ? The dream state does not follow, nor is bound by, a sequential spacetime like the conscious mind, but more of a dynamic spacetime. So what of hallucinogens, that provoke imagery of idential entities in different people ?

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

Wrong, Consciousness did Not emerge, Consciousness is Eternal. We have always been Here and Now, We always had our Eternal Consciousness, . So, 'Why did Consciousness emerge?', is a Non- question, based on pure believe.

[@chrisbennett6260]

Do you think any of thoes two gentleman believe that

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

Believe have to do with the ability to believe, the growing Intelligence and experience will gradually inactivate the ability of believing, as is based on Feeling, (and Instinct)

[@stephenzhao5809]

1:38 do you see that in an evolutionary context? RB: absolutely uh I think humans evolved a new mental states and new capacities specifically for communicating I mean I'm thinking now the human trait the essence of what set us off in our unique path in evolution was communication as you know in evolutionary theoriests first started thinking about humans they said uh well the big brain is the key ... two questions: why the upright posture which set us apart from the other apes and what did get intelligence evolving. I think the best answer is that the gerat posture was to use the hands for communicating. communicating is a pretty good case the gesture preceded speech and even today two humans if you don't speak the same language we start communicating by gesture uh one another side of htis is we can teach a couple of the other primates to communicate by gesture but none of them can talk because they don't have enough control so the movement of the larynx and all the other things that made speech ... [what about wolf kids who never develp human language capacity?] 5:48 Bob: the picture sounds very rational the problem I have is that in determining through evolution our phsical characteristics and how we get different postures and different limbs all that makes sense they're all of the same kind same category but we talk about consciousness that's a totally different category nothing like it we can imagine in the phyiscal universe until we found consciousness uh does that trouble you? 6:15 RB: Well that troubles evrybody. uh the what's called the hard problem of consciousness of how inanimate physical things can produce subjective experience nobody has a clue and uh everybody's very interested and uh you know like so yes that is a troubling uh problem for everyone uh in terms of consciouness most people write about it distinguished two levels uh there's one that we share in common with other animals and one that seems to be more uniquely human uh animals are different from plants plants don't need a central nervous system they don't need to bring all the information together so they can decide what to do because they don't do that much and they can grow over here and it doesn't matter whether the other side does but animal is going to walk this way the whole animal has to walk this way so it needs a central processing so there is we believe most people believe uh some lower level or differen level of consciousness in other animals where there's a central experience of the world information is gathered and behavor is controlled to some degree there's another level or another kind that's 7:26 more distinctively human with symbolic representations simulations away from the here and self-awareness all these other things that uh make us distinctively human but so in that sense human consciousness is not coming out of nowhere it's an improvement over what uh our evolutionary forebears and animals had the big mystery is how the first kind of animal consciousness got started so that there was some awareness some subjective experience of the world once you have that then the human you can see as a refinement with some additional features uh to enable us to function as we do.

[@AlmostEthical]

Thing is, the latest AIs communicate excellently without ostensible need of qualia.

[@antimaterialworld2717]

thats why consciousness implies qualia.

[@HeavenlyWarrior]

Consciousness emerged? That's a really bold claim to start with let alone asking why... Nobody knows if consciousness emerged or was created or always existed.

[@andreassovrea5312]

Did Consciousness emerge due to decision "TO BE"? Is Consciousness the selfperception that generate perceptions ?

[@antimaterialworld2717]

consciousness is not emergent phenomena,its eternal. It appearence or disapearence depends on object of percepition being presented before observer.

[@fullyawakened]

Asking why consciousness emerged is about as useful as asking why the common cold emerged. It exists because it can, because the conditions of this universe allow it. We can trace the evolution of consciousness back through the evolutionary timeline just as easily as we can trace fossil records of animal lineages. It has no purpose or reason, and its potential and grandeur would be greatly diminished by attempting to apply one.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

could subjective / conscious experience cause inanimate things?

[@anglodutch8321]

Who's to say it wasn't 'reality' that emerged out of consciousness ?

[@hencole]

You just said it. Now point to some evidence for that, and explain how conciousness can pre-exist without some reality for it to be contained within.

[@antimaterialworld2717]

@@hencole mundane logic cannot answer this question. They both exists simultaneously. There is no contradiction.

[@anglodutch8321]

@@hencole Maybe that pre-existing consciousness is radically unlike our physical reality. Maybe it gives rise to our perception of that reality but is itself a timeless, placeless thing. I have no proof, obviously. All hypothesis.

[@highvalence7649]

@@hencole to ask for evidence for that claim seems to be a category error. Evidence is a category relevant to scientific hypotheses and scientific theories. But metaphysical theories like materialism and idealism are not scientific hypotheses or scientific theories. They are metaphysical theories. Different category, so different justification criteria than empirical evidence are going to be relevant. And why wouldn’t consciousness be able to pre exist without some reality to contain it?

Poetry is a kind of romantic fantasy about some consciousness. I wonder how the science of sounds fits in with creativity.

[@chrisbennett6260]

It doesn't

@@chrisbennett6260 That is not true. You can't fool me.

[@gentlestorm]

Consciousness is an illusion I think. We just narrate inside our head with language, but that is about it.

[@Shane7492]

Illusions happen within consciousness. Consciousness itself, at its most basic, cannot be an illusion. In fact, it is the only thing that can't be an illusion. Everything else is metaphysical philosophy.

[@billyrankin8890]

With that comment you have just shown your poor understanding of consciousness.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

*"Consciousness is an illusion I think."* ... Why? What's so wrong with "reality" that it must be misrepresented as an illusion? And if you "think" consciousness is an illusion, then how can you trust what you think about consciousness?

[@chrisbennett6260]

Your the illusion.

[@chrisbennett6260]

That's your opinion if you feel that strongly what's stopping you from killing yourself after all your consciousness is just an illusion . That reminds to check out the British soul group Imagination hit it's just an illusion From the early eightes jazz funk soul early eightes boogie era Which is infinitely more beautiful and better than anything on here and makes more sense

[@chrisbennett6260]

A whole lot theories but jack diddly squat clue other than speculation

[@RuneRelic]

Tell me more about how form was driven by functional necessity, without admitting that function comes before from ? 😏

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Org defines conscieness though simples Life proceedings. However it is lacking neurosicience standard . Roy conscieness picture reality though his unpredicted conscieness. It is NEVER definitions principles show up conscieness.

[@highvalence7649]

Prove consciousness emerged

[@highvalence7649]

Again they are presupposing consciousness emerged in the first place as opposed to thinking consciousness is fundamental and all there is. what is the reason for thinking consciousness emerged? people usually appeal to evidence regarding how affecting the brain in certain ways affects consciousness in certain ways. but when asked how this evidence supposedly supports the proposition that consciousness is necessitated by the brain, but not, or more than, the proposition that consciousness is not necessitated by the brain, they dodge / won't give clear reply. obviously this is a fail to defend / back up their view.

[@Christopher.W]

It's an anthropomorphic view of consciousness to assume that consciousness emerged from physical matter. We have to be open to the possibility that consciousness may be fundamental to all existence at some level.

[@highvalence7649]

How is it anthropomorphic?

[@francesco5581]

i think some kind of intelligence is fundamental (top down or the inverse) while consciousness is an expression of it.

[@highvalence7649]

@@francesco5581 what is intelligence without consciousness? I just understand intelligence to be an ability or power of consciousness.

[@francesco5581]

@@highvalence7649 i think there is a basic intelligence in the universe (panpsychism?) from the basic ability to read information (a chemical reaction for example) to the activity of plants. Intelligence can be also related to the capacity of the universe to create complexity...to act... laws of nature also use "intelligently" matter to create rules that sustain (And allow) a complex universe.

[@Christopher.W]

@@highvalence7649 Excellent question. It's anthropomorphic to assume all consciousness is consciousness as we understand it, aka having human qualities. There is some evidence that consciousness exists in ways we don't understand that are actually fundamental to all existence. Ie., the photon double-slit experiment.

[@NothingMaster]

THE REAL QUESTION IS: What is it that we think we are ultimately conscious of?

[@antimaterialworld2717]

in this connection you might find interesting Vedic concepts of 'lila' and 'rasa'

[@mrbamfo5000]

Plants communicate with other plants, and some insects.

[@dimaniak]

Humans don't need qualia to survive. Chalmers disproved evolution!

[@Peaceprojector]

Remember I'll come back

[@BillAwty]

Your guest today, Roy Baumeister, talks as much with his hands as he does with his voice. Why do some people do that? It is most distracting. I keep losing focus on his words. Is there a fundamental reason why I never use my hands when I speak?

[@Samsara_is_dukkha]

You always have the choice to close you eyes...

[@ZubairKhan-vs8fe]

Short answer He doesn't know

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

Lucy has debunked unless you think it was an over night leap.

[@Peaceprojector]

Why don't you listen

[@samsonsupaka5911]

Consciousness questioning it's own question of consciousness? No, unless consciousness is third party.

[@antimaterialworld2717]

yes, God.

[@HakWilliams]

IT WAS EVOLUTIONARY ADVANTAGEOUS. DUH.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

Why DUH? Although I know I have a tendency to think, everyone is pretty much like me, I keep rediscovering that is simply not the fact and what seems obvious to me is definitely not obvious to others.

[@HENRYIII003]

Every time a baby animal gains consciousness, the world explodes in a zillion fiery deaths but a few survive. Later in life, you may develop a fear of spontaneous combustion, if you catch a glimpse of the moments that pass us by. Don't think too much.

[@thedude666]

You have this backwards, everything emerged from consciousness; not the other way around.

[@mojoomla]

That would be too simple and boring for these intellectual masturbators

[@joshkeeling82]

How so? The universe existed before consciousness emerged on earth. That is a fact.

[@johnyharris]

So you emerged from a dogs consciousness?

[@Shane7492]

@@joshkeeling82 That is metaphysical philosophy not proven as fact.

[@kevinkant6817]

She belongs to the streets

[@hamdaniyusuf_dani]

Dolphins and whales developed complex language before making tools.

[@brandonhodnett5420]

The idea that self awareness came about by evolution makes no sense

[@deanodebo]

Emergence is a concept created by consciousness. So is evolution. This guy is spewing his incoherent religion, scientism.

[@mintakan003]

I'm not sure his examples of "consciousness" are convincing. Ants are able to coordinate, with their own form of communication. As for word, followed by another word, as opposed to sentences, and paragraphs, we now have examples in LLM (large language models), such as ChatGPT, which can write whole coherent essays. It is able to model larger, abstract concepts (though in an associative way), over just a run of consecutive individual words. Probably the closest to what we mean by "consciousness" is "self awareness". The evolutionary mechanism of perception, modeling, and reacting to the environment, turns in on itself, is self reflexive, and is able to model itself, and its own processes. Model of a model. Meta-cognition. There is now a "self". The evolutionary advantage, is a much greater degree of freedom, more varied ways to respond, over instinct. This includes changing one's own programming. It allows for greater flexibility and adaptability.

[@peterdesmidt8742]

Consciousness might have developed to pick between the advice given by our many unconscious processes.

[@fortynine3225]

The universe is all about sublimation/refinement and stuff like consciousness is a useful tool for that.

[@chrisbennett6260]

If you say so

[@fortynine3225]

@@chrisbennett6260 So we did not got more intelligent and more refined over time all the time? And so is the case with the universe since it is exactly what happenen on this planet. You must be blind ...plenty evidence all over the place..

[@udaykumar-lv4xo]

Consciousness is a percieved experience of the field... we have experience of things, particles and it's forces all along in our life.but not the field. ... One creates many and eventually many experience the One..

[@MooseCracker]

I've heard that intelligence in animals has more to do with brain density than brain size; if that's true, i wonder if consciousness is also a product of density.

[@Dion_Mustard]

intelligence and consciousness are two very different things.

[@djelalhassan7631]

Consciousness Didn't Emerge, Consciousness Was There From The Beginning Everything Else is Emerged From Consciousness

[@Dion_Mustard]

Consciousness didn't "emerge"..it has ALWAYS existed. It is some sort of energy field which is neither created nor destroyed. I have had personal experience of non-local consciousness (separation from my physical body),so I know without any doubt that consciousness is MORE than brain. I don't need anyone to tell me different. I know exactly what I experienced.

[@hencole]

You may have 'experieced' that, it doesn't mean it happened. Psychadelics, sleep paralysis and other explanable phenomena can create that experience without the need to invent your infinitely existing energy field.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

I am conscious of the glass. Not because the glass and I are one. But because I see it.

[@Dion_Mustard]

@@hencole sorry , i 100% disagree. such a comment is from someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. i experienced, you didn't. so end of.

[@Dion_Mustard]

@@hencole kzbin.info/www/bejne/p5m8eZaEm5WmeLs

[@manfredullrich483]

"... nobody has a glue." So true in that particular case. Is it a singular problem or entity, or an emergent one, based on sub-proto-consciousness parts (in everything). Or even a theistic approach, no one can be sure.

[@aminomar7890]

consciousness type one is triggered by an action (100%) correct, that happens during the process of waking up if someone is asleep and felt something dangerous, ….. even in daily life the waking up process is triggered by an action (already wrote before about the location in the brain),….

[@TheOnlyStonemason]

LOL, the question itself assumes consciousness “emerged”…

[@highvalence7649]

Yeah, I wish they would question this assumption more, and in a serious way

[@DeanHorak]

All of the things he claims are the domain of consciousness are actually performed unconsciously - including any sequential patterns recognition or generation. Consciousness is 100% passive experience. It is merely the inward facing sense of what is occurring within the unconscious processing in the brain as it integrates and persists memory.

[@mother3crazy]

Consciousness is an emergent phenomenon derived from the evolutionary ability to predict things. Humans are like clairvoyants in the animal kingdom; we can not only predict instinctually which direction prey will run, but also predict an infinity of things from how our fellow man will react when we deliver him sad news, or what will happen if we veer into oncoming traffic. By constantly being in a state of noticing and predicting things, the resulting “mind image” is this amazing amalgamation of everything we’re doing, called consciousness.

[@highvalence7649]

Yea that's an evolutionary view on consciousness. But why would we think this view is true?

[@mother3crazy]

@@highvalence7649 Because every other faculty of life originated from evolutionary processes.

[@highvalence7649]

@@mother3crazy but why would we think consciousness is a faculity of life and not the other way around?

[@highvalence7649]

@@mother3crazy wait the person on your pic kinda looks like a child. You're not a child, are you?

[@mother3crazy]

@@highvalence7649 Nope, I was 16 when I took my profile pic but I’m 28 now.

[@brothermine2292]

It's always amusing to see how many KZbin commenters claim to understand the true nature of consciousness.

[@therick363]

Right?! and then when you ask them simple basic questions….man do they become rude and condescending

[@brothermine2292]

@@therick363 : Yes, my experience is that they eventually become rude after I ask them why they believe their bold claims, as if the burden is on me to explain why they're wrong.

[@highvalence7649]

@@therick363 like what questions?

[@highvalence7649]

@@brothermine2292 like what bold claims?

[@brothermine2292]

@@highvalence7649 : Bold claims such as ”consciousness is fundamental and reality is an illusion,” for example. Because consciousness is so poorly understood, a claim that ”consciousness is X” (for some non-obvious X) is bold. To be taken seriously, bold claims should be accompanied by citing good evidence/reasoning. I don't think I'm as extreme about this as Carl Sagan, who famously said ”extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” (ECREE).

[@oliviamaynard9372]

Bees talk to one another. They relay much information about the nature and source of food to the hive. The logical conclusion is bees are conscious agents?

[@1SpudderR]

Are you conscious of your Subconsciousness? Nope! Yet your Subconsciousness is Conscious Of You.......And this Subconsciousness is already writing the script that you are verbalising! Comprehending That, is in the Present or Now ....and You only perceive it, consciously in the past. Which implies that Conscious is holistically connected to all the Dimensions.....ALL THE DIMENSIONS.... 0 and 1......

[@georgegrubbs2966]

Yes, we do have a clue about the so-called "hard problem of consciousness." See, Mark Solms for starters, and go from there. But, consider another theory of conscousness. In a recent paper in the Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, December, 2022, Budson, Richman, and Kensinger introduce a theory they entitle, "memory theory of consciousness." The title of their article is, "Conscousness as a Memory System." They say, "We argue that conscousness orginally developed as part of the episodic memory system -- quite likely the part needed to accomplish the flexible recombining of information. We posit further that consciousness was subsequently co-opted to produce other functions that are not directly relevant to memory per se, such as problem-solving, abstract thinking, and language." "We suggest that episodic memory and its associated memory systems of sensory, working, and semantic memory as a whole ought to be considered together as the conscious memory system in that they, together, give rise to the phenomenon of conscousness." "The conscious experience IS the process of remembering." "Our theory is that conscousness developed with the evolution of episodic memory simply -- and powerfully -- to enable the phenomena of remembering." [Note: Baumeister touched on this indirectly when he spoke of teaching and learning.] They contrast their theory with the "global workplace theory of consciousness." They agree with much of that theory but modify and add to it. "The major distinction is that our theory adds that the original purpose of consciousness was (and a major purpose still is) to facilitate the encoding, storage, retrieval, and flexible recombination of prior events using episodic memory and its related memory systems." I recommend the paper to CTT, Roy Baumeister, and and other interested parties.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

(1:00) *RB: **_"You can't share information without being conscious of what you are saying."_* ... That's because *_information_* is at the core of what we call "consciousness." Consciousness and information are one and the same. Two atoms trading an electron, a sperm and ovum constructing new DNA, and two individuals exchanging their ideas during a corporate meeting are all examples of an *"exchange of information."* This 13.8-billion-year information exchange will continue until Existence encounters the highest possible state of information that logical conceivability allows. ... _This is what Existence is all about, my friends!_

[@ALavin-en1kr]

If consciousness is fundamental then without it nothing exists. The view here is that it is biological only. This is a limited view. There is no concept of devolution, evolution,, involution. The only thing considered is evolution which is linear. Devolution means from space, linear evolution is on the ground, involution is the reversal to space. Until this is understood there is cluelessness as is apparent in any of these discussions.

[@tedgrant2]

It's very difficult to catch a bird, but being conscious helps.

[@Dan53196]

Nope. Wrong. We could have developed the ability to speak unconsciously. It doesn’t explain consciousness.

[@CesarClouds]

Evolutionary byproduct?

[@highvalence7649]

Why would we think consciousness is an evolutionary byproduct?

[@CesarClouds]

@@highvalence7649 Because nothing prevents it from being so.

[@highvalence7649]

@@CesarClouds so if nothing prevents some claim from being true, you think that claim is true?

[@CesarClouds]

@High Valence If the evidence suggest it, yes. This is very basic stuff.

[@highvalence7649]

@@CesarClouds well that's different. You didn't say anything about evidence first. What evidence suggest consciousness is an evolutionary byproduct or otherwise a product of the brain / body?

[@jdc7923]

Nothing that Mr. Baumeister said explains anything about HOW it is possible for physical processes to generate conscious experience. He just says that consciousness is useful, so if some physical process can generate consciousness, that process will be favored by natural selection. The late, great Stephen Jay Gould opined that consciousness must have evolved by accident, because natural selection can only do its work on a creature's DNA, a physical thing, not on a resulting feeling that arises (consciousness).

[@nneisler]

Plenty of animals are conscious so talking as a prereq is wrong

[@RolandHuettmann]

I do not think this is true what he said or talks around it. A machine could learn and communicate with other machines, even teach them, also communicate with us,, but not be conscious.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

Machines don't evolve. Yet.

[@RolandHuettmann]

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL Even if they could, I do not conceive them of becoming conscious. It is another domain altogether.

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

@@RolandHuettmann I am conscious of a tree because my eyes pass a neural discharge frequency encoded representation of the tree into my brain. This representation then modulates the very complex being conscious thought process that is my self. Thus my self is conscious of the tree. If the machine uses cameras for eyes and has been programmed to run a being conscious thought process that can be modulated by representations produced by its vision subsystem then there is no doubt that the machine has the basis for being conscious. Of course there are bound to be some very challenging complexities to sort out but that it can be done in principle I have no doubt. I am staunchly opposed to it being done because of the potential for inadvertently creating the most awful horror in the newly conscious mind as it learns of its artificial circumstance and while it contemplates its poor likelihood of ever knowing love (although about that I am speculating (even Hitler had a girlfriend)).

[@REDPUMPERNICKEL]

(I can conceive of the possibility that there are human beings capable of loving a self trapped in a machine).

[@RolandHuettmann]

@@REDPUMPERNICKEL I cannot see that a machine would have a Self, or call it "life" even if it exhibits all outside features of what we call life. We do not have an understanding yet of what consciousness really is. This waa discussed here many times. Magnetoelecrical fields, etc. are not consciousness. Sure, we only "know" what we create as images and experiences within ourselves. There is no direct access to reality. I conclude that it is all but a virtuel reality for that reason. What is behind? -- How to figure it out? So many unanswered questions...