Can you prove (to others) that consciousness really exists?
2007-09-12 09:21:16 · 18 answers · asked by jesussalvation 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
My goodness, the insults... you really do have to weave through answers in R&S to get to some reasoned debate...you'd think the atheists would be secure enough in themselves to forgo insults and sideswipes and just get to the point.
The opint of my question is to see if people believe in consciousness because they experience it for themselves or whether they base it on scientific evidence. Indeed, CAN science provide evidence of consciousness (and not just brain activity, which presupposes the existence of consciousness).
2007-09-12 10:00:20 · update #1
haha - you again. Why do you ask irrelevant questions about proving things or not?
... I suppose you're saying that we can't prove consciousness's existence just like God's existence... but in both cases we can see the "effects" or the result?
Its a sad attempt, keep working though, you'll come up with better (or dig up better... its unlikely you're a *thinker)
2007-09-12 09:26:20 · answer #1 · answered by vérité 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It's a difficult problem and one that we are consistently dealing with. For example, what level of consciousness can we prove a cat has, or an ant, or a chimpanzee? But we can prove a variety of intelligences in creatures, for example how well do they learn a particular action/consequence, can they learn from observing other creatures, and can they learn communication skills?
But there really isn't a question of whether consciousness really exists. It's kind of like asking can we prove that any matter really exists? We know we have consciousness, we know there are varying levels of consciousness.
2007-09-12 09:33:15 · answer #2 · answered by The Bog Nug 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What does this have to do with atheism? One does not prove anything about the real world. Proof is only possible in Math and Logic. In the real world we estimate probabilities based on evidence.
If we define consciousness as an awareness of our own thoughts we certainly have personal evidence of our own consciousness. And certainly it makes sense based on our understanding of the brain that the brain might evolve those feedback mechanisms.
2007-09-12 09:26:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Consciousness is a tricky area of research because it is not a material object, nor is it a force, or any other such thing. It is a dynamic information system. For that reason it can not be directly observed or measured. However, its effect can be observed, and that's the best we can do today. Within a century, we will be able to reproduce it mechanically, and then it will become much easier to analyze and measure.
2007-09-12 17:31:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you a solipsist? If not, you already believe in others consciousness. But if you are, you don't believe I exist anyway.
edit: It's a great question, and there are still many mysterious about the relationship between the brain and the mind. But I believe I would categorize my own consciousness under "proprly basic."
2007-09-12 09:33:49 · answer #5 · answered by Eleventy 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes I can. Persons who exhibit consciousness have different brain activity (i.e. some brain activity) than persons who don't.
I would also argue that awareness of consciousness is a priori , because you couldn't ask the question without first being conscious of the possibility of consciousness not existing.
2007-09-12 09:28:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
This is Cartesian. One certainty about our being is that we are capable of contemplating our being. Berkeley would say that it is NOT possible to prove to others that consciousness exists but Descartes would offer them the means to test for themselves whether they thought they were. Which would be proof for them.
Neither is wrong. It depends whether or not your point is to prove to another that consciousness exists, or whether or not you can offer another the means of proving that THEIR consciousness is real (to them).
2007-09-12 11:06:54 · answer #7 · answered by Bad Liberal 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its no longer a bluff. A bluff would mean all of us understand that it does exist and not making use of a physique. a lot of human beings nonetheless talk with the language and understand lots of the concepts through fact various the worldwide is THEIST. history is ruled by ability of them. I examine the article recommendations of an afterlife are not any doubt drawn from the organic desire to no longer DIE. we've imaginations, and so consequently can arise with 'religious' nonsense as nicely different issues. i like the way it truly is written nonetheless it is going on a sprint approximately death being no longer something. regardless of the undeniable fact that i think of it shows that cognitive dissonance is truly person-friendly in our society on the instant. nonetheless analyzing. wow, i detect it an exciting article delving into the human recommendations. I do see that cognitive dissonance is an element of the human dynamic. i think of the article has lots an exceedingly sturdy valid factors. "as a replace it’s lots greater “organic” to think of them as latest in some imprecise, unobservable locale, very lots residing their lifeless lives.". thank you for pointing this text out.
2016-11-10 06:22:58 · answer #8 · answered by baskette 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are thinking of consciousness wrong.
Consciousness is a term used to describe a certain state. Consciousness and unconsciousness.
Not some spiritual mumbo jumbo.
2007-09-12 09:28:44 · answer #9 · answered by NONAME 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Healthy people satisy the psychological definition of consciousness, if that's what you mean. Planning to twist some definitions, are we?
2007-09-12 09:27:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋