What is it like to be you? Impossible to know.

I bought a book written by Sam Harris' wife, Annaka Harris, because the title appealed to me  (Conscious: A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of Mind), and I wanted to see if she'd disagree with her husband -- a noted atheist neuroscientist whose Waking Up guided meditations I listen to every morning via an iPhone app.

As I suspected, this little (110 pages) book didn't contain much that I didn't already know. But Harris did discuss consciousness in an appealing fashion, and had an interesting take on the possibility of panpsychism. 

Here's how she distinguishes between prescientific notions of all matter being imbued with consciousness in some sense, and modern versions of panpsychism.

Some versions of panpsychism describe consciousness as separate from matter and composed of some other substance, a definition reminiscent of vitalism and traditional religious descriptions of a soul.

But while the term has been used to describe a wide range of thinking throughout history, contemporary considerations of panpsychism provide descriptions of reality very different from the earlier versions -- and are unenumbered by any religious beliefs. 

One branch of modern panpsychism proposes that consciousness is intrinsic to all forms of information processing, even inanimate forms such as technological devices; another goes so far as to suggest that consciousness stands alongside the other fundamental forces and fields that physics has revealed to us -- like gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces

Harris prefers the second idea, that consciousness is fundamental to matter. This is a simpler concept than assuming that consciousness emerges at a certain stage of complexity in information processing. 

After all, I find it hard to accept that the thermostats in our house are conscious, even though they do process information about the temperature in our home, comparing it to the temperature we desire, and "acting" accordingly. It's a bit easier for me to envision that my iPhone is conscious, though this also is a big leap of faith.

The main problem with studying consciousness is the definition Harris uses, which is founded on Thomas Nagel's famous paper, "What is it like to be a bat?" 

An organism is conscious if there is something that it is like to be that organism.

Now, obviously this doesn't entail a self, soul, or such. All that's required to be a member of the Conscious Club is there being something that it is like to be you. Or me. Or anybody. Or anything. 

Because we humans have a finely honed sense of what it is like to be ourselves, and love to describe that sense in words, music, poetry, and so many other ways, we reasonably assume that our fellow Homo sapiens also are conscious. However, there's no way that we can be sure of this, since there is no way any conscious being can know what it is like to be another conscious being.

(Thankfully, really. My wife and I have been married for 29 years. We're still learning about each other, which makes life interesting, given that neither of us has access to the other person's subjective side.)

This makes consciousness seem mysterious, even though it also is the most obvious and familiar thing we know, given that all of our experience, every bit of it, is known by consciousness. A robot could be programmed to answer "Yes" if asked the question, "Are you conscious?" Yet this wouldn't prove it was conscious.

Thus consciousness has to be inferred in every being other than the entity that directly knows what it is like to be what it is. 

I'm virtually 100% certain that our dogs are conscious. Ditto for the squirrels, deer, coyotes, raccoons, and other creatures that inhabit our neighborhood. In fact, I can envision almost every living thing being at least minimally conscious, even a starfish or an ant.

As Annaka Harris notes, the problem arises when we try to establish a firm dividing line between conscious living beings and unconscious living beings. Plants respond to stimuli and have an awareness of their surroundings. Is the oak tree in our yard conscious?

Maybe. But since I can't fathom what it like to be a bat, in no way could I even begin to fathom what is like to be a tree, assuming there is anything it is like to be a tree.

Rocks and other inanimate objects almost certainly lack consciousness in the What is like to be.. sense. Yet they are composed of atoms and molecules that obey the laws of nature. How are they able to do this? Or, does that question even make sense? It does if panpsychism is accepted.

Near the end of her book, Harris writes:

It's important to clarify a few points regarding the distinction I continue to draw between two categories of questions -- those pertaining to how deep in the universe consciousness runs and those about the brain processes that give rise to our human experiences - along with the value I place on each of them.

First, although I'm defending panpsychism as a legitimate category of theories about consciousness based on what we currently know, I am not closed to the possibility that we might discover, by some future scientific method, that consciousness does in fact exist only in brains.

It's hard for me to see how we could ever arrive at this understanding with any certainty, but I don't rule it out. Nor am I discounting the possibility that consciousness is something we will never fully grasp.

Those are pleasingly open-minded sentiments. I just wish religiously-minded people had the same uncertain attitude.

Comments

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Brian

You wrote
"Thus consciousness has to be inferred in every being other than the entity that directly knows what it is like to be what it is."

Even in ourselves, we make an inference.

"We think we move but we are being moved." - Goethe

It is our unconscious, what we don't know, where all the mystery lies. Being unaware of it we presume it doesn't exist. But the opposite is the case. Consciousness may not actually exist, but the mechanisms of the brain most certainly do, and most of those we are entirely unaware of.

From above Harris writes

"I am not closed to the possibility that we might discover, by some future scientific method, that consciousness does in fact exist only in brains."

It doesn't actually exist in our brains. Or anywhere else.

There is no actual seat of conscious awareness in our brain, only controls that can ramp wakefulness and awareness up or down.

Our awareness is an amalgamation of different processes. That we infer a single consciousness for ourselves is just an over simplification. A convenient short hand, like belief in God. It's an artificial concept.

"I" am a convenient construction. Much of what I believe about "I" isn't based on what I know, but what I would like to believe. What I hope might be so.

That's OK, but it's subjective.

[Dungeness]

Because we humans have a finely honed sense of what it is like to be ourselves, and love to describe that sense in words, music, poetry, and so many other ways, we reasonably assume that our fellow Homo sapiens also are conscious. However, there's no way that we can be sure of this, since there is no way any conscious being can know what it is like to be another conscious being.
However, there's no way that we can be sure of this, since there is no way any conscious being can know what it is like to be another conscious being.

That's true as long as we're trapped in duality and perceive
fellow H.Sapiens as "other". In actuality, we don't even know
if "others" exist separately. In the constricted awareness of a
night dreams for example, we take all the actors to be real,
yet, when we wake up, we realize they were chimeras.

But, if we're fully super-conscious as mystics claim we can
potentially be, we "know" we are the dreamer. We're play
acting in a dream of our own making. We're reading all the
lines, playing all the roles in a puppet show.

If you're just parroting lines from the mystic handbook like me
though, don't share too much... especially with a spouse.
They may throw something at you.

[Q8i]

sat- truth
chit - consciousness
anand - bliss
satchitanand is the root of it all.
so matter of any kind to every atom is conscious!

[Fairy]

"Human beings are simply not isolated islands of consciousness." Roger Nelson , Global Consciousness Project Director (GCP).

There is a website Signs of the Times (SOTT) that has all manner of articles on mind matters, consciousness, plant awareness, conscious symbiotic relationships, conspiracy theories, science publications, quantum physics, ETs, UFOs, and all sorts of interesting reading. Some "fake" and some very pro Republican, Fox News biased stuff, ( I would be a Democrat if I lived in USA) but otherwise in the main, there are always lots of very interesting articles to read on all manner or nature of things. Especially about mind and matter and the nature of consciousness and consciousness in animate and inanimate forms of existence.

How is this for a little giggle? I loved my dear old "Farnia" ( far-near) 1994 Mazda Familia car I bought in 2003 and I had for 15 years.( We have many old cars in NZ as well as new). It ( she) served me well. When I traded her in at a dealer for different and newer second hand car, I felt quite sad. I took photos inside and out beforehand, and gave her a hug and a kiss. "She" has always had a special kind of energy, her own entity. Now whether that was my projection or not, who cares? I said to the car dealer that everything is alive for everything is made up of atoms and molecules and vibrations. ( Now what is it that makes up those vibrations?)
Anyhow, he laughed at me. Probably thought what a nut case! As I drove off in my new car, I looked back at my old one, and it was totally empty, devoid of Farnia. Then suddenly, I realised Farnia had rein-car-nated into my new "granny" car, and off we drove together in harmony!

When I was a very young child and my parents sold our old ford prefect to get a newer car, my sister and I fed our old car pink and white sugar coated peanut lollies through its front grate to say goodbye.

If you believe in quantum entanglement, then everything is connected through non physical means at a subtle vibratory level.

Once I was at a talk at a Theosophical Society and the western man who had studied the Vedas for many years and who sang the most beautiful vedic prayers, asked the audience who were psychics. Of course many put up their hands. He laughed and put them in their place. He said, "A true psychic would NEVER admit to being so, for true psychic ness is worse than eating shit!" Only true psychics would understand his statement. An aware being and meditator who has cleared the mind from circling thoughts and constant chatter, and one who is not schizophrenic, is able to "hear" in true clareaudience (?) and if really awake, able to "see" in true clarevoyance. And able to feel the emotions projected by others in close proximity or from
a distance. Is this is an experience of quantum entanglement?

The Mahayana Buddhists have a protection mantra from any negative intentional or unintentional projections from these psychic effects.

OM GATE BHYE GATE ROSA KRUSHA MANI SVAHA (×7) ( Actually dispells anger).

No matter what people write, it is my belief that everything that exists, ever has done and ever will, is all connected. True emptiness is dependent on all things interconnected or entangled to make THE ONENESS. The sum is the total of its parts. Everything needs everything to be.

[Meditator]

Because of consciousness or whatever it may be called its something that makes me living while awake and almost dormant while napping or in dreams and just nothing while unconscious or if in coma, to relive again after in this body. May be other body after death if this could be a phenomena covering life after death.

I have seen myself as short memory person at times. To me this is strange. Mean even when I was fully conscious, aware I still could not recillect later. I was helpless. It mean that it is not the consciousness which does all but it is definitely other intermediary that supports consciousness. It could be brains while in body but what when Out of Body.

[Spence Tepper]

As we, in America, approach the 4rth of July holiday, known here as "Independence Day" celebrating Freedom from oppression, I'd like to wish all my Church of the Churchless colleagues, everywhere around the globe, good wishes for a true "Independence Day" from untruth, superstition, prejudice, guilt (the kind used to manipulate, not the sincere regret and desire to make amends which is a hallmark of humanity) and doubt in the face of authority. Also, thank you Brian Ji for creating this place.

Trust your gut, folks, and use your voice....Let's let Independence Day mean something. Stand up for Truth!

If we are going to achieve Independence and true freedom from falsehood, it will be done as an individual, leading your own parade, not a groupee following someone else's judgement about right and wrong.

Spence

[Dungeness]

Trust your gut, folks, and use your voice....Let's let Independence Day mean something. Stand up for Truth!

Ah, call me cynical but I keep hearing an echo of "Pay da man, Dude" in
your soaring rhetoric. Even now, with perfunctory mention of "family", it's
still never "Dhillon family, yeah you know who are, pay da man, Dudes".

I'm surprised ya didn't add "give up greed, un-guru-ly ways, confess sins
and deception, desist that heretical trashing of RSSB scripture, and, oh,
by the way, just cop a plea on those death threats. I know in my heart
you made 'em, didn't ya".

If we are going to achieve Independence and true freedom from falsehood, it will be done as an individual, leading your own parade, not a groupee following someone else's judgement about right and wrong.

Yep, use your "voice". Listen to your "gut". Ignore the courts, grab those
torches and pitchforks, go to the Guru's castle. Call out that imposter.

It's time for a revolution, with each leading his/her own parade to the
bonfire. We've got a witch to burn*.

P.S. This might all be a metaphor for storming that castle inside of course.
If that was the idea, I salute ya! Burn, baby, burn!

[Turan]

I am of the opinion that being conscious is an aspect of being human – along with a few other primates and creatures. The conscious ability seems to have evolved from awareness, awareness in the sense that even the simplest of organisms react to their environment. It is more than likely that primitive awareness evolved into the self-awareness that we call consciousness. Neurologist Kevin Nelson in his book the God Impulse describes how “The neurological basis for consciousness is well established – the brainstem awakes the thalamus and cortex above, which in turn brings us the human experience – the mundane and the transcendent.” And adds, “No brainstem, no consciousness.”

One could say that the entire universe is aware (not conscious). Every atom reacts to stimuli, forms into elements, gases, chemicals, suns, planets – and us. Philosophers seem to have invented the term consciousness, decided it is a 'hard problem' and made a career out of it. As our understanding of phenomenon has grown, concepts such as souls, gods, heavens, spirits and so on have faded away. Consciousness – a concept that appears to define us – is perhaps the only concept left which we use to cling to as the last bastion of the hope that we are somehow special and deserve more!

Awareness then is primordial, it is the state of everything – nothing unnatural about it. In this sense there is no death (the thing that is largely responsible for many of our supernatural beliefs) only a redistribution of atoms, though the mental structures of mind, self and ego cannot accept this as their very raison d'etre is to survive – even if only as a thought, an idea or belief.

Consciousness - a problem made from nothing.

[tucson]

Scientists sound impressive but they really don't understand consciousness at all. Roger Penrose is considered a genius physicist at the level of Hawking and others, but he doesn't know anything about consciousness. This is not to denigrate Penrose. There are lots of things he does know. Some pretty cool things, but consciousness, nope.

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/roger-penrose-on-why-consciousness-does-not-compute?utm_source=pocket-newtab

To ungenius me there is this conscious presence that is aware right now. It can't be explained in objective terms and yet here it is. Things do not appear TO this presence but rather AS this presence. The content of awareness IS the awareness. The telephone over there is imbued with this awareness.. the wall, the dogfood dish, the window.. anything. Awareness takes the shape of experience and yet remains as it is.. consciousness. It has always only been this seamless oneness. No objects or separate entities to be found anywhere. Why? As consciousness, just consciousness, the question does not arise or matter.

[James]

Brian Have you seen the work of Jurgen Ziewe?
How is it that we can stare at a fire or a sunset with endless fascination? We are inherently attracted to things of beauty. Where does that come from? After many OBE's , I see it as we are trying to get back to the inner worlds we came from. Everything we do here Drugs,Sex, and Rock n Roll or whatever is our souls endless quest to get back to those worlds. Your learning experience with RSSB doesn't stop that search. That's the purpose of all meditation, it's not mindfulness, it's the experiences. Without the inner experiences as Jurgen wrote of, life sucks.

[Amar]

Hi James, I disagree. You're saying life sucks unless you can experience the inner stuff. So what happens if you tried for 30 or 40 years and still didn't hear a single tinkle or clap of thunder inside? Does life still suck?

Sounds like escapism. You can do both. Seek inner experience and still be mindful.

[Meditator]

we need replace the hatred, jealosy, ego etc the negative aspects of life if we may have, to get closer to those valued experiences apart from efforts in meditation.

Frustrations are obvious if results don't match with belief driven. expectations.

if we could. become childlike in our thoughts and actions-reactions perhaps results should be visible even with other meditative practices by different groups other than RSSB even though I myself is just at elementary stage.

RSSB claims depth or highest status possible to which it can take ones soul while it may be same steps and visions at initial stages for all spiritual sects proposing meditation at eye centre as an escape point.

[Vijay]

Amar have you tried for 30 or 40 years of diligent 1/10 of you day shabd meditation and say that you have experienced nothing? I don’t mean heard the sound but you are honestly telling everyone that you did this and yet you have gotten nothing zilch nada out of it? Really?!!

[Neon]

Yes Vijay, people try all their lives and still get nothing. If they do, I find it hard to believe anything holy about sounds you hear in your head.

[s*]

Yes lots of people try hard in their live's meditations ,but they do not come at the point expected..
and believed..
There can be a Blissfull state definitely..but that is different from Radiant form and going trough Sun and Moon..etc..
So blissfull loving states..for sure..
Maybe not always..
It's happy when that is there..

[Vijay]

Neon and S meditate without expectation and enjoy the bliss it provides. This bliss is the bridge between the outer and the inner worlds. There is so much happiness and wonder in the practice itself that the light and sound are just a sign posts of progress.

[Jim]

Amar Yes but without constant inner experiences how can one be mindful? You're putting the cart before the
horse. Mindfulness without inner mind blowing experiences such as Jurgen had is just a mental exercise.Your
using the mind (a computer) to become spiritual.

[Amar]

You're wrong. I have had inner experiences, but I love how you point it out with such enthusiasm. I guess the arrogance is just a minor by product. I had most of my experiences before I was initiated. I continue to have them as well.

My issue is not with the meditation practice, it's with the guy who's on the dais saying one thing and doing another.

If you all got your heads out if your collective asses, I didn't say I had meditated for 30 or 40 years, I said if you had... If I meditated for over 40 years I'd be well over 60. I'm not.

You all are living in a dream world if you think only RSSB initiates have inner experiences. A lot of people have them, they don't understand what they are. My 5 year old nephew just heard/saw funny sounds and light yesterday morning.

As far as mindfulness goes, how can you meditate if you're constantly thinking of the past and future? You can o ly meditate if you're present in each breath right now. So mindfulness is a part of any meditation practice.

[s*]

No Jim, mindfullness is a great thing to do also..
Just looking inside for what is there in the moment..
Maybe pain physically or emotionally..Just look and be aware about what is happening.
That gives insight and also often pain/or suffering relieve..
Sometimes there is just bliss..or devotional feelings and love..
All sorts of things can happen with for instance insight meditation.
One can also feel fine with doing RS mantra or a different mantra..just what suits you.

In this moment I see the beauty of So Ham( I am( that..)and Sat Nam God or the Higher..
So..One can also just Be..,in Silence..
Walking meditation is also nice..
Everything is possible..done with dedication..
As I see it..

[Neon]

I find it odd in 2019 we have people believing about "inner regions" lights and sounds. It's all neural activity. Nothing holy and nothing spiritual.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Neon
You wrote
"It's all neural activity. Nothing holy and nothing spiritual."

It might be purely neural activity, but that can also be holy.

All thought is neural activity. Noble sentiments, and evil ones.

Kindness, helpfulness, self - sacrifice, avarice, greed, theft....

It's all neural activity. Every lovely sunset is, or at least passes through, neural activity. Anything you can conceive of, any human behavior... The sacred and profane are all part of neural activity...

And all neural activity is part of this physical creation... We are all connected, and we don't yet understand all the ways. So mystery, discovery and wonder are also part and parcel of neural activity.

[Jen]

I do the best I can to be mindful when I am awake and going about my daily life and I certainly don't expect any kind of spiritual awakening.

I don't even meditate any more because it seems pointless. Whatever anyone experiences or sees within is probably simply imagination and programming in the brain.

Why the need to feel happy as if thats the end game in life? Isn't it more important to be as totally aware as possible with each thought, word, action, every situation that karma throws at us, especially in the most difficult of times the best we can do is face the present moment and be in the Now, and thats Mindfulness.

[Jim]

Yes Jen happiness is the end game. That's why everything you do here is motivated by the innate need to be blissed out of your mind. Why is that? Because that's the place we all came from. It is impossible to stop that search until you have the experience of walking in those worlds again. Where every step you take is orgasmic,for lack of a better word.

[Jen]

Hi Jim,
Yes, looking forward to being blissful and happy in another dimension, so I am just doing the best I can now here on this planet and still hopefully evolving spiritually and will get there eventually... I'll say Hi when I see you there... ;)

[Neon]

Hi Spence,

Per that logic, just electrically stimulating parts of the brain will let you reach sachkand. (Actually its even been seen in Temporoparietal stim that people get out-of-body experiences) Suppose meditation is just another way of stimulating those. Does that mean god or a singular omnipotent power exists? Unlikely.

[Turan]

There is quite a lot of hype about regarding meditation/mindfulness. It is true that so-called spiritual experiences, although wonderful are simply the result of brain activity. Such experiences can occur through meditation and any other time – they can also be evoked through drugs and in the laboratory.

As I understand meditation, although various experiences can occur they are of little importance. The main purpose is the enquiry into the mind, as it is the mind that is responsible for all our fears, desires, divisions, thought and ideas – all the frantic mental search for answers, for masters, for pain and pleasure. It is said that to enquire into the mind is to understand the self – the source of all our problems – anything else is just playing games.

A lot of truth in the old Zen/Taoist admonition – “Why am I unhappy? Because 99.9% of the time you are thinking of yourself, and there isn't one!

But this is our lot, we prefer to play at being mindful or spiritual rather than enquiring into who/what is enjoying the diversions that help us avoid ourselves.

[Jim]

FWIW How many people here have had a OBE type experience as detailed in RSSB literature?
Check out this guys tech
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCexVLyvZKffrdf8hg2_SoQw
Cheers!

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Neon
The electric stimuli studies brings up a good point about science and its misuse.

Would you claim that the sun is not real because the experience of light can be simulated through electrical stimulation?

There are differences which help demonstrate the two are different.

Yet we perceive both through similar brain mechanisms.

And both sunlight and electrical simulation are external sources of stimuli.

Through meditation we can become aware of other sources of stimuli as well, and all of it coming through the body.

Perhaps we are finding out about our own natural connections to the rest of this creation. It's amazing how much more you can see and hear by better looking and listening.

[Amar]

Hi Brian. Just got this book as well. Haven't had a chance to get to it yet. Currently reading through a book by Mark Williams: Mindfulness: An Eight-Week Plan for Finding Peace in a Frantic World.

Very well written and I'm already sure I'll have to reread it again. Has a great forward by Jon Kabat-Zinn.

Already putting this into practice, since it's still fairly new to me, but I can already sense a new calmness and clarity of thought at times during the day, when I remember to center myself. So hopefully, as time goes on, I can apply and experience more of this. My wife already can see a change in my attitude and overall improved mood.

Keep bringing up more books to read. Although I might not agree with a lot of the topics, it still adds to my understanding and exposes one to alternatives and thought processes one might not have thought of.

[Todd, aka "Blinder"]

I happened across this blog quite by accident when doing a simple search for "oars" for my old rowboat. A hit came up entitled, "Reality is a boat with no oars", at a site you already know the name of. Finding it at least worth a look, I clicked on it and found that it was an entry from 2010 that appeared to deal mainly with the corruption of "spiritual" leaders that some people appear to follow blindly. I admittedly didn't delve into the details - it's an old story that we've all heard before.

Now imagine my amusement when I clicked on the link for July, 2019 (nine years later) and discovered that the general content was almost exactly the same, like a soap opera that never really progresses anywhere, instead repeating similar little dramas (with minor variations), and featuring the same archetypal characters over and over again.

Nonetheless, "Church of the Churchless" appeals to me, being indeed churchless myself, having had a powerful transcendent experience in my childhood that I was wholly unprepared for; one that turned me into a heretic (defined as one who refuses to accept or openly opposes traditionally held beliefs) at a young age. I may not have known what it was that I had experienced, but I very definitely knew what it was not! It didn't take long to arrive at the conclusion that all the seemingly genuine masters were saying essentially the same thing, while most of their followers were condemning the other paths as false, for if the others were true, then must not their own master be teaching falsehood? Such an idea is intolerable, of course, so the conflicts continue, completely ignoring the malleability of perception by culture and early teachings, as we all build the framework that allows us to perceive the world around us in a manner acceptable to parents, teachers, and our own culture.

There will always be those who are willing to check their brain at the door, or "drink the Kool-Aid". That is their choice, and it's a choice they have a right to make. Yet you offer a service here, and I think it a valuable one, by pointing out that any teachings (or perhaps far more importantly, the interpretations of those teachings) must stand up to the illumination of one's own inner light, and any directions to the guidance of one's own inner compass.

Please carry on.