Defining “Consciousness” presents a great dilemma in that we all know we are conscious yet, despite hundreds of years of thought by some of the world’s greatest philosophers, a concise definition of what defines the state of “Consciousness” continues to elude us.

I have incorporated a fascinating set of YouTube videos featuring Peter Russell presenting his view of Consciousness comprising a fundamental aspect of the Universe, equivalent to space, time and matter. The videos comprise a single presentation by Peter Russell, divided up into 7, approximately ten minute clips.

The presentation in it’s entirety presents considerable food for thought and is well worth watching. It certainly provides some material to ponder.

Consciousness

A Working Definition
There are many different proposals with respect to the specific criteria that define consciousness, or conscious awareness. For example, recent research into coma patients has distinguished between a vegetative state and a minimally conscious state (see these “The New Scientist” articles [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]). These brief articles hint at the ethical and scientific issues associated with defining “Consciousness”.

There have been a wide range of potential criteria proposed for defining “consciousness” and, as a result, a widely acceptable definition of the conscious state, or consciousness, has proven to be very difficult, even elusive, to establish. For the purposes of this article, we will use the following definition (taken from Wikipedia and references therein):

“Consciousness is subjective experience or awareness or wakefulness or the executive control system of the mind[1] It is an umbrella term that may refer to a variety of mental phenomena [2]. Although humans realize what everyday experiences are, consciousness refuses to be defined, philosophers note (e.g. John Searle in The Oxford Companion to Philosophy)”.[3]

“Anything that we are aware of at a given moment forms part of our consciousness, making conscious experience at once the most familiar and most mysterious aspect of our lives”

- Schneider and Velmans, 2007[4]

Awareness

An Intrinsic component of Consciousness
“Awareness”is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something” (Wikipedia).

In the series of YouTube video clips below (comprising sequential portion of a single presentation), Awareness is proposed as an intrinsic component of Consciousness, a means of recognizing and defining Consciousness.

Primacy of Consciousness

The following YouTube video clips comprise a single presentation by Peter Russell, sub-divided into 7 approximately 10 minute clips.

In this series of video clips, Peter Russell presents his interpretation of “Consciousness”.

Clip #1

The basic problem associated with “Consciousness” is the fact that we can’t measure it and, if we can’t measure it, there is no way to prove it exists in the framework of the scientific method.

In this first clip, Peter Russell presents a review of Consciousness and how one might begin trying to define it, with the resulting difficuties inherent in such a definition. The two foundation stones upon which he begins to develop his argument is that:

1. “One thing we can’t deny is that we are conscious:., and
2. “We can’t deny we are experiencing“.

Of course, one can’t define “Consciousness” by stating we are conscious and so he proceeds from there to the fact that something that is Conscious is also Self-Aware, integrating Awareness and the Capacity for Awareness into Consciousness.

Clip #2

Proceeding from the Ability to Experience, Peter Russell describes an analogy of a movie projector (or slide projector, etc.) as a means of producing an image on a screen, representing a “Form”. He then goes on to propose other kinds of Forms associated with Consciousness.

“Our consciousness has the potential to become every experience we ever have, or could ever have or any being could ever have”.

“We all know we’re conscious and there’s no way to explain it” which leads to “The Hard Problem”:

“How does something as immaterial as consciousness arise from something as unconscious as matter?”.

- David Chalmers (University of Arizona)

Peter Russell then introduces the term “Paradigm” as:

“The accepted theories, values, and scientific practices within which a particular field of science operates”

- Thomas Kuhn
(The structure of Scientific Revolutions)

and discusses the revolution in thinking in moving from the Geocentric Worldview of the Universe to the Copernican Worldview as an example.

Clip #3

Having defined a “Paradigm” and given an example of a “Paradigm Shift” from a Geocentric to Copernican Worldview, Peter Russell then defines the 6 steps defining the process of a Paradigm Shift, as follows:

1. The existing paradigm encounters an anomaly (an inexplicable observation),
2. Initially, the anomaly is ignored or rejected,
3. People try to explain the anomaly within the existing paradigm,
4. A new paradigm is proposed in which the anomaly is resolved,
5. The establishment rejects the new model, often ridicules its proponents, and
6. The new paradigm finally gains acceptance as it accounts for new observations.

“Every Truth passes though three stages before it is recognized:

1. First, it is ridiculed
2. Second, it is opposed
3. Third, it is regarded as self-evident

- Arthur Schopenhauer

Having defined a Paradigm, Peter Russell then defines a Metaparadigm as:

“The paradigm behind the paradigms” or,

the basic foundation upon which subsequent paradigms have been built.

The first “Metaparadigm of Science Peter Russell proposes is that:

“The real world is the material world. Space, time, and matter are primary”.

with the corresponding anomaly being “Consciousness” as:

• It cannot be doubted and
• It cannot be explained

One of the unquestioned assumptions of the current metaparadigm is that:

“Matter is insentient”

At this point, Peter Russell proposes an alternate Metaparadigm:

“Consciousness is a fundamental quality of the cosmos - as fundamental as space, time and matter”

that some level of consciousness extends down through all lifeforms to matter itself.

Clip #4

Peter Russell references parallels in the thinking of mystics with regard to Reality.

“Consciousness is in everything, Everything is in consciousness”.

Given that all of our information with regard to the world comes to us through our five senses,

“Everything we know is an experience in the mind”.

“The mind experiences qualities which are purely offspring of the mind alone”.
- A.N. Whitehead

“We assume there is an objective reality”.

Clip #5

The second unquestioned assumption of the current metaparadigm Peter Russell proposes is that:

“There is an objective reality”.

and proposes the Alternate Metaparadigm that:

“There is nothing but consciousness. Consciousness is more fundamental than space, time, and matter”.

Out of Einstein’s “Space-time” continuum comes the properties of “Space” and “Time”.

Clip #6

Peter Russell now introduces the “Principle of Least Action” as:

“In any process, Nature always does it (the process) in a way that the amount of Action is a minimum”.

After introducing some equations in Mechanical Physics, Peter Russell points out that the definition of “Action” is application of Energy acting over a period of Time, as follows:

Action (ML^2)/T = Energy (ML^2/T^2) x Time (T),
where M = mass, L = distance, “^2″ = squared and T= Time.

Furthermore, {Planck’s constant, in units of ergs / sec (or Energy / second) is equivalent to “Action”, therefore,

“Every photon of light is an identical unit of Action“.

“Whatever the underlying “Field is (whether a Unified Field or a Field of Consciousness), it’s first manifestation is Action”.

Finally, Manifestation is Action (or Activity).

From this train of thought, Peter Russell then states that “Sensory Forms” consist of “Matter”, “Space”, “Time”, “Particle / Wave (Duality)”, “Causality” and “Locality”.

Clip #7

Peter Russell concludes with a comparison of mystical statements of “I-ness”, “Am-ness” and God-hood with his argument of Consciousness as a fundamental property.

Summary

I found the presentation to be very interesting and thought provoking. His discussion of Time and Distance from the perspective of (a photon) of light to be very interesting, as it “travels” from Emission to Absorption.

As Peter Russell progressed in his arguments toward his proposal of all matter as having “some level of consciousness”, I was struck by the principle of “Anthropomorphism” with regard to his example of throwing a jellyfish on a fire. In this example, he is suggesting that we feel something (remorse?) if we were to throw a lower life form (the jellyfish) onto a fire. Obviously, this is a form of violence upon the jellyfish and what, I believe, he is implying is that we might experience recognition of another consciousness.

An alternative perspective for this example is that we are “projecting” ourselves onto the jellyfish, imagining what it might feel (if it had some level of consciousness / intelligence) and are, therefore, guilty of “Anthropomorphism“.

Personally, I find this to be a critical point in the progression of his argument. If we can accept the “intuitive” proposal that some level of consciousness extends down to the level of matter, then the progression beyond to “Consciousness” as a primary aspect of the Universe, equivalent (or even more fundamental) to Space, Time and Matter, can be evaluated

If, however, one believes that progression to be an aspect of Anthropomorphism, then the progression fails.

Tweet This Post