The hard problem of materialism - multiverse
Lately, materialists have found an oasis of hope in the Multiverse. There is no big deal consciousness is here, because there's an infinite number (or a very big number) of universes out there with different laws and constants and this is just another universe where the constants happen to be suited for consciousness, they say. Well, this doesn't change absolutely anything, it is just another tactic of inventing something new and state that ''it proves this and that''.
So let's play this game and assume we have an infinite Mega/Multi-verse:
1. No restrictions: all possibilities that we can and cannot imagine are there. The problem is that this includes supernatural because we imagine it - fatal for materialism;
2. Restricted: only materialistic infinite reality. The problem with this view is that it basically makes absolutely no difference if materialism does not show that consciousness itself is nothing special.
This is not a statement that consciousness is something special, but if it is, then the mere fact that it exists even in an infinite reality represents something extraordinary, due to the restrictive nature of that infinite reality. So size does not matter here.
Conclusion: even if the reality is infinite, materialism has to go back at the same core-issue and prove consciousness either does not exist, or to state the identity theory, both having very implausible successful outcomes.
''Consciousness is special'' imply:
1. Strong emergence/panpsychism/dualism, other non-materialistic views
2. It exists
3. Movement of atoms in the brain are not the same thing with consciousness
So let's play this game and assume we have an infinite Mega/Multi-verse:
1. No restrictions: all possibilities that we can and cannot imagine are there. The problem is that this includes supernatural because we imagine it - fatal for materialism;
2. Restricted: only materialistic infinite reality. The problem with this view is that it basically makes absolutely no difference if materialism does not show that consciousness itself is nothing special.
This is not a statement that consciousness is something special, but if it is, then the mere fact that it exists even in an infinite reality represents something extraordinary, due to the restrictive nature of that infinite reality. So size does not matter here.
Conclusion: even if the reality is infinite, materialism has to go back at the same core-issue and prove consciousness either does not exist, or to state the identity theory, both having very implausible successful outcomes.
''Consciousness is special'' imply:
1. Strong emergence/panpsychism/dualism, other non-materialistic views
2. It exists
3. Movement of atoms in the brain are not the same thing with consciousness
Comments (36)
Panpsychism isn't necessarily non-materialist (assuming by "materialism" you just mean "physicalism"). One of the biggest contemporary proponents of it is Galen Strawson, who straight up titled a paper on the topic "Physicalism Entails Panpsychism".
What you define as supernatural for this universe may be natural in other universes.
Quoting tim wood
You were a bit vague with that. The identity theory states that consciousness is exactly the same thing with a particular particles interaction, not an effect of that, not correlated with it. Is there a problem with that? Many say it is, but it is not the topic of this discussion.
You are right, but the mainstream ideologies are called materialism and panpsychism, and they are competitors.
Interesting, could you please give me more details on that?
The alternatives are that either nothing metaphysically new starts happening then, because there is nothing metaphysically mental going on in anything ever -- eliminative materialism -- or else nothing metaphysically new starts happening then, because everything metaphysically necessary for mind as we know it is already going on everywhere all the time -- panpsychism.
Basically, whatever is metaphysically necessary for minds as we know them either happens for nothing (eliminative materialism), for only some things (dualism, and strong emergentism), or everything (panpsychism). Only the first and last are really compatible with physicalism, the middle ones are not.
I think this is incorrect. An infinite multiverse does not mean anything one may imagine can actually happen. What an infinite multiverse implies is that everything that is physically possible must happen, and then logically must happen an infinite number of times.
In an infinite multiverse there’d be an infinite number of exact copies of you and me and everyone else.
I didn't say that's the case. I wrote it as a variant. Read 2. And by the way, who decides what's physical, natural and what is not?
What's physical or natural is what can be checked against empirical experience.
The supernatural therefore definitionally makes no difference that anybody could possibly tell, so its existence and its non-existence are indistinguishable and therefore identical.
I guess if string theory is true it probably sets limits on the number of possible physical laws.
It totally makes sense to me, but.... But as always, things are complicated! I should open a discussion called ''Why things are so damn complicated!?''. But let's assume there's a law of nature that allows consciousness to exist only in some circumstances, let's say in a DNA structure. So the law exists there, is fundamental, but consciousness appears only when criteria are met. Maybe consciousness is a kind of information that contains information about itself and it can be created when two types of information meet. None of them is conscious, but when they combine, they become something new and conscious. I'm not saying it's probable, but I don't see it impossible.
The OP isn't meant to argue the Identity theory. All I am saying is that over time, materialism has come up with all sorts of answers for consciousness which are really not convincing (e.g. identity theory). So now, some of them invented this multiverse argument in order to solve the problem. So the main topic was the multiverse argument, not the identity theory.
1. And how can we prove it is an accident? It is just an assumption.
2. Even if it is an accident, the hard problem remains and as long as it remains, it is going to be problematic for materialism.
Absolute Infinity does indeed imply that all things are possible, and all possible things are actual. But the Multiverse is not timeless or changeless, hence not absolute. Instead, it is a dynamic directional process with no known beginning and an unknowable ending. Only spaceless-timeless Infinity-Eternity (Enfernity) is absolute. And the powers of being & causation exist necessarily in Enfernity.
Sorry to intrude with such a strange out-of-this-world comment. But your post triggered a train of thought relevant to my own little game of knowns. :chin:
Sounds very elegant and in my opinion plausible, but being at the beginning of my quest for answers, I also find plausibility in other theories. But I can say what has convinced me not to be true so far :
- ''The illusion of consciousness''
- Idenity Theory
- Consciousness is a classic ''weak emergence'' phenomenon
You've raised something interesting hee, but please answer me a question first: the Absolute Infinity you mentioned, if it exists, it also include what we would call supernatural? (magic, gods, etc.)
1. What is "absolute infinity"?
2. Give a rational explanation of how that implies anything. :chin:
Let's assume it was an accident indeed, not a purpose of nature. But in order to happen, it must be possible. So I am arguing that the very possibility of its existance in a finite/infinite universe is incredible by itself. From quantity to quality, from non-aboutness to aboutness, etc.
Here's a link to a mathematician's concept of Absolute Infinity. What that limitless notion implies is usually posited, in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim traditions, as an eternal deity : the supernatural "ground of being", God, Allah . In my personal worldview, Enfernity (eternity-infinity) implies a non-humanoid Creative Principle from which space-time, matter-energy and natural laws emerged. It's not knowable empirically, but infer-able rationally. :cool:
Absolute Infinity : [i]The Absolute Infinite (symbol: ?) is an extension of the idea of infinity proposed by mathematician Georg Cantor.
It can be thought as a number which is bigger than any conceivable or inconceivable quantity, either finite or transfinite.
Cantor linked the Absolute Infinite with God,[/i]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_Infinite
Thanks. I should have looked it up. For those enraptured with set theory it must seem appropriate that it borders on the divine! :cool: