How can we be sure that what we consider as inanimate objects are truly lifeless without any awareness at all?

Answer 1

We can't. There is no way of eliminating the possibility of consciousness from matter regardless of its form. It is undeniable that consciousness exists, but there can be no account of it from a description of how the brain works because no description means the same as "I think that I'll go to bed now", "I love you", "I can see a red box over there" and so on. It might describe exactly what is going on in someone's brain or body, but it won't mean the same thing. Nor is there a separate soul because it would not be able to interact with a physical body, and the world is not imaginary either because a mind which can imagine a world this complex would be God and one's own mind would then have the same status as what was being imagined by that God, even if it was supposedly one's own subconscious.

However, any structure which exhibited intelligence is conscious. Imagine a robot which simulates your personality, memories and everything about you exactly, but is made of electrical circuits rather than flesh and blood. It would be mere prejudice to say it wasn't conscious. Similarly, there might be an intelligent alien made of different chemicals, a version of you made of antimatter or a hydraulic copy of your nervous system, all of which could have a conversation with you exactly like a human. The only thing which would stop you from saying they were conscious would be prejudice.

Therefore, i see awareness as inherent in matter in a similar way to magnetism. The protons and electrons which make up matter are all magnetic, but only exhibit magnetism when arranged in particular ways such as a bar of iron whose atoms are lined up in the right way. That is what consciousness is like. It's a fundamental property of matter which only becomes manifest when that matter is arranged in a particular way, just like magnetism.

Answer 2

We don't know. We don't know that other people do have any awareness. That other people are aware seems a safe assumption (to the extent that we can assume anything) based on their anatomy and their behaviour. That animals are also aware seems similarly safe for similar reasons. There are features of plants that suggest that they have some limited form of "awareness", but nothing comparable to human or animal awareness.
When you get down to rocks, it becomes more and more difficult to justify that they might have any awareness without positing that awareness has nothing to do with the physical structure of its "bearer". This is quite an extreme postion even amongst philosophical dualists (people who believe that consciousness is something separate from the physical properties that accompany it). There are any number of problems with it - for example, if that is the case then why do we cease to be conscious when our brain stops functioning? Why do particular brain injuries seem to correspond to particular cessations of cognitive function?

It seems more reasonable to me to conclude that physical objects are probably not aware - they don't have the physical structure which allows for outside information to be received in any way. Indeed, aside from the idea of the physical object - that we see a certain object as a table, for example, and so can toy with the idea that "the table" does not want "its" leg broken off - it isn't clear what would be doing the receiving.

Hope that makes sense.

EDIT: Grayure (below), I don't agree that exhibition of intelligence necessarily means an entity is conscious. On the one hand, an alien which did not exhibit intelligence might still be conscious. On the other hand, if a robot exhibited intelligence this might indicate consciousness or just clever programming. (don't forget that the Turing test was meant to be "one-sided"). In any case, the appearance of possessing awareness is not the same as actually possessing it.

I take your general point, but I still think that the way an entity is structured is a helpful indicator of when we should hypothesise that an entity is conscious: relying on how the entity acts would both over- and underdetermine the range of potentially conscious entities.

Answer 3

The moment an object is addressed as 'inanimate' it is an acknowledgement that it is not animate is it not? Otherwise, why should it be so addressed? If the ego matter about the inanimate is true, Then the question arises, what about the so called animate objects. Are the animate ones ego less? The correct situation should be, exactly opposite-non-animation in the case of inanimate object is due to inertia of mass. While animation in the animate object is due to ego! Treating the above philosophically, as both the animate and inanimate objects are subject to change and decay, they can not be 'real'. 'Ego' can not be associated with unreal thing. The one that is real can not have ego and therefore, 'ego' itself is unreal!!

Answer 4

It appears that information garnished from genetic science that the genes for insect legs and human legs are virtually the same. In this we see we are fully made of many things and probably enjoy, so called, a distant kinship with some fat hairy spider? What this suggests is that all manner of creatures and perhaps even plants are part of our primitive psyche and since most individuals are demonstrating a quality far less than than the fabled "human being", their degradation into these primitive psychic relationships gives rise to this association, somehow manifested in the flesh form.
The key to this description of course is that the body is the past and reflects the pattern of the psyche, if we share our genetic structure with insects, we also share the psyche of insects.

A little off point but I trust this helps.

Peace

Answer 5

well i think that at least some of them have some perception of a reality around them.

i mean if you think about it i dunno a million years ago when we were but cave men i will bet you that we thought tree's weren't alive.

and also isn't it funny how attached you can get to something that never actually does anything without are manipulation.

personally i got a thing bout vehicles,(i think my bike got jealous when i wrote it off and got a new one),shoes i H8 throwing shoes away it does feel like throwing away an old friend and of course toys i know i ain't the only one who used 2 (and has been known to still) put stuffed toys in more comfortable positions of talk 2 em /bury em .

i mean who know they may have a completely diff rent reality of us and have life in a way that we cannot even comprehend.
maybe we will evolve in2 rocks.

every1 loves sleep and when sleeping we are pretty much just inanimate objects with little awareness of our surrounding maybe someday we will sleep forever as a golf club.

Answer 6

All persons, places, or things are all aspects of consciousness, or vibrations of thought within the spectrum of mind. All things have a vibratory force that it emits by reason of its molecular make up. Of course what we see is essentially non-material, but is ether of a far more denser velocity. What this means is that structuring of a object as in its form or characteristic is truly a vibration of thought within consciousness, and our interpretation of it is literally the interpretation of a vibration of mind, or an aspect of our consciousness. So its all thought, having a vibratory force to it which corresponds to a nature imbued in consciousness. A rock is a rock because it represents a specific level of consciousness. So the world isn't an illusion but rather a allusion of the mind, illustrative or reflective down to its very root.

So of course there are no such thing as a lifeless thing, because when we see things or interact with it, we are engaging what is in us.

Answer 7

I think it was one of the oldest religions in the world - Jainism or Buddhism I am not sure which, says that awareness in minimal in a rock, wakes up in a plant, starts moving about in animals and comes to fruition in humans. There are supposed to be creatures/ beings of more intellect in other dimensions / worlds (call them angels or so on) until you reach the Supreme God Head (which is not there in both the religions I mentioned earlier). We evolve gradually through all these stages. But what is the soul/ spirit (again not recognized by those two religions....)?

Answer 8

I am 100% certain that the wristwatches I have worked on are aware of me.

Not kidding, its kinda spooky. People bring me watches and look at them, shake their head and say "Hey, it wasnt working a second ago" they walk away and five minutes later bring it back again, stopped. After awhile I just told people I was "The God of Watches" and that my subjects were just showing their respect. Heck, I think a lot of people believed me.

Seemed counter-productive to me. I was there to fix the watches and make money, not exert an aura that did it for me! Still the effect never lasted long, and often didnt work at all, but when it did... it was just plain funny.

Answer 9

A slab of marble or granite holds no grudges regardless of whether we carve a statue out of it or a shrine to the deity. It is truly lifeless but immortal beyond the boundaries of time.

Answer 10

All is vibration.

You can communicate with other vibrations by making contact with their vibration. To talk to a rock, put your hand upon it, it will respond back to your touch, as you can feel it. If you get very quiet, you might be able to detect a communication given to you from it.

The capability to communicate is different according to the structure of the object, and the visible structure of the object tells you about it's evolution and capabilities to exchange communication with you.

What you receive from other forms/vibrations depends upon your own awareness and your consicousness, or what you think and also your abliity to connect with the consciousness present in all things.

As you grow in awareness, you grow in your capability to communicate with other objects outside of yourself. As you get closer to being a living expression of light, you merge with the source vibration which gave birth to all things.

So in essence, you can't be sure about these things until you know, so perhaps you do the less harm, by taking care of all things around you as if they were alive, believing it's true until you know it.

Betsy