# Why Philosophy Matters **URL:** \ **Category:** Philosophy\ **Created:** [June 11, 2023, 12:29am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293 "2023-06-11T00:29:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![write4u](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/write4u/32/23410_2.png) [@write4u](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/write4u)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2023, 7:00pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/41 "2023-06-26T19:00:14Z")
> [quote=“citizenschallengev4, post:39, topic:10293”] > > ### KEY POINTS > > - Homeostasis could explain consciousness in physical terms. Pain! > - The biological roots of consciousness are deeply related to emotions. Emotions are biochemical processes and not subject to choice. > - Attention does not depend on homeostasis and can explain many types of unconscious reasoning. Correct. Homeostasis does not require conscious attention, when it can perform perfectly without wasting precious energy for conscious thinking. There is no such thing as unconscious reasoning. There is a subconscious biochemical reaction outside any conscious control. Remember anesthetics do not affect homeostatic functions. An artificial thermostat is comparable to an unconscious biological fever sensor that makes you consciously “feel” badly because something is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2023, 3:45pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/42 "2023-06-27T15:45:38Z")
> [@write4u](#): > > There is no such thing as unconscious reasoning. But the body does do **sub-conscious** reasoning. 😉 I don’t really know what you’re talking about and neither of us knows enough to speak with any authority in the first place. You mention evidence, why not spent a bit more time absorbing some of this? Imagine there could be more to this than our old lessons taught us. ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/uploads/centerforinquiry/original/3X/5/f/5f5ff03341f5894acfb2bb95efc2d62a101320f1.webp) > [@write4u](#): > > Consider that when you receive anesthetics only your conscious brain becomes inoperative, while the subconscious homeostatic part of the brain remains active in controlling the body’s functions. We aren’t anesthesiologist and I don’t agree with your simplifications, > **[The Entwined Mysteries of Anesthesia and Consciousness: Is There a Common...](https://pubs.asahq.org/anesthesiology/article/105/2/400/6651/The-Entwined-Mysteries-of-Anesthesia-and)** > > THE mechanism by which general anesthetics prevent consciousness remains unknown largely because the mechanism by which brain physiology produces consciousness is unexplained. But the two mysteries seem to share a critical feature—both consciousness... > ## Introduction: Entwined Mysteries > > THE mechanism by which general anesthetics prevent consciousness remains unknown largely because the mechanism by which brain physiology produces consciousness is unexplained. But the two mysteries seem to share a critical feature—both consciousness and actions of anesthetic gases are mediated through extremely weak London forces (a type of van der Waals force) acting in hydrophobic pockets within dendritic proteins arrayed in synchronized brain systems. Unraveling this common thread may reveal not only how anesthetics act, but also why we are conscious in the first place. You should enjoy this one: > … This article reviews what is known about mechanisms of consciousness and anesthesia, finding that the “fine grain” of neuronal activities supporting consciousness and the molecular actions of anesthetic gases are one and the same—van der Waals London forces acting in hydrophobic pockets of coherently synchronized dendritic brain proteins. London forces are not chemical bonds but weak quantum interactions (in this regard, anesthetic gases differ in their actions from all other pharmacologic agents). Thus, the relative selectivity of anesthetic gases implies that the quantum nature of London forces may play an essential role in brain function leading to consciousness. … > … > … The transition from unconscious processes to consciousness is a key question. Most authorities agree that only a small fraction of the brain’s 100 billion or so neurons manifests the NCC at any one time, although many more are active.(13) But the same neurons and networks are not always “conscious”—signals and information do not travel to a particular part of the brain where consciousness happens. In the theater metaphor, the spotlight is constantly shifting, with represented content of particular γ-synchronized neural groups becoming conscious sequentially, selected by attentional processes and emotional saliency. (But why γ-synchronized neural activity has the subjective character of experiential awareness remains unexplained.) > > Therefore, consciousness seems to be a process, a sequence of transitions from unconscious activity to experienced content, _e.g._ , frames or scenes shifting up to approximately 40 times per second in γ synchrony. … * * * > … “There’s a folk psychology or tacit assumption that what anesthesia does is simply ‘turn off’ the brain,” says Earl Miller, Picower Professor of Neuroscience and co-senior author of the study in _eLife_. “What we show is that propofol dramatically changes and controls the dynamics of the brain’s rhythms.” > > Conscious functions, such as perception and cognition, depend on coordinated brain communication, in particular between the thalamus and the brain’s surface regions, or cortex, in a variety of frequency bands ranging from 4 to 100 hertz. Propofol, the study shows, seems to bring coordination among the thalamus and cortical regions down to frequencies around just 1 hertz. … It gets complicated. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2023, 4:10pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/43 "2023-06-27T16:10:08Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > But the body does do **sub-conscious** reasoning. 😉 Not sure what the wink means. I googled “sub-conscious reasoning” and the first hit was Quora. I don’t care much for Quora. The answers are often, um, bad. No scientific definitions, no charts of “Here’s how you reason sub-consciously”. There was this, on the first page of hits. Uh-oh. Kant. [https://philarchive.org/archive/MASPOA-4v2](https://philarchive.org/archive/MASPOA-4v2) ---
**Author:** ![write4u](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/write4u/32/23410_2.png) [@write4u](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/write4u)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2023, 4:36pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/44 "2023-06-27T16:36:35Z")
> [quote=“citizenschallengev4, post:42, topic:10293”] > But the body does do **sub-conscious** reasoning. 😉 It does subconscious processing. It has no need for reason! > I don’t really know what you’re talking about and neither of us knows enough to speak with any authority in the first place. > > You mention evidence, why not spent a bit more time absorbing some of this? Imagine there could be more to this than our old lessons taught us. ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/uploads/centerforinquiry/original/3X/5/f/5f5ff03341f5894acfb2bb95efc2d62a101320f1.webp) Impressive network. I wonder how it is all connected and communicates information, some sensory, some biochemically. The biochemical part needs no “reasonIng”. It is only the sensory part of the brain that makes you superficially aware of yourself. ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2023, 7:53pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/45 "2023-06-27T19:53:15Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > No scientific definitions, no charts of “Here’s how you reason sub-consciously”. There was this, on the first page of hits. Uh-oh. Kant. > > [https://philarchive.org/archive/MASPOA-4v2](https://philarchive.org/archive/MASPOA-4v2) Uh-oh, Kant. > Phenomenal intentionalists typically hold that there is a kind of intention- ality that is constituted by phenomenality.6 This idea implies that the condi- tions that a state needs to satisfy in order to count as a state with phenomenal intentionality are phenomenal conditions. One task for the phenomenal inten- tionalist is thus to provide an account of the phenomenal conditions that con- stitute phenomenal intentionality. We can call this the constitution problem. One way to solve the constitution problem is to equate the conditions for phe- nomenal intentionality with the conditions for phenomenal objectivity. It is easy to see why one might be tempted to do so. Note that experiences with phe- nomenal objectivity have other-presenting phenomenal character. One might regard this feature as constituting the core of phenomenal intentionality. It is in virtue of having this phenomenal directedness toward the other that expe- rience has phenomenal intentionality. So it is in virtue of having phenomenal objectivity that experience has phenomenal intentionality. Thus a theory that explains the phenomenal conditions in virtue of which experience has phe- nomenal objectivity would thereby explain the phenomenal conditions in vir- tue of which experience acquires phenomenal intentionality. In this construal, explaining phenomenal objectivity would be at the core of any phenomenal intentionality research program by providing a solution to the constitution problem. > > The phenomenal intentionalist might, however, refrain from equating the phenomenal-intentional with the phenomenal-objective. The phenomenal intentionalist might hold that some states that possess phenomenal intention- ality lack phenomenal objectivity. For example … Oh boy, you can say that again. > [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > But the body does do **sub-conscious** reasoning. 😉 Let me clarify. “Sub” as in below. “Conscious” as in what you are conscious of. > [@write4u](#): > > It does subconscious processing. It has no need for reason! Processing, Reasoning, call it what you want. Okay, people _reason_ over information, animals _process_ information. My point is that no matter how you say it, there’s an awful lot going on within your body below the level of our mind’s conscious appreciation of it. > [@write4u](#): > > It is only the sensory part of the brain that makes you superficially aware of yourself. So what? What’s that got to do with the body keeping you alive and aware _and being the essence of this mysterious “You” that so many want to foist off as an illusion._ ---
**Author:** ![write4u](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/write4u/32/23410_2.png) [@write4u](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/write4u)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2023, 10:28pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/46 "2023-06-27T22:28:19Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > So what? > **What’s that got to do with the body keeping you alive and aware** _and being the essence of this mysterious “You” that so many want to foist off as an illusion._ But here you are already removing the body from the “You.” You is the “sentient being” that uses the body for purposes of survival. How do bacteria help keep you alive? Are they sentient? What then keeps a single-celled body alive? How about a paramecium? It has no brain at all but can learn to navigate around obstacles. How about a slime mold? It has a lot of cells but still no brain. Yet it prefers oats over other foods. Without a brain how is one conscious? IMO, conscious awareness in biology has a range of sensory utilities and sensitivity that starts with purely biochemical interactions and the gradual increase of complexity and an evolving “understanding” of the data being processed. ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2023, 1:59pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/47 "2023-06-28T13:59:15Z")
> [@write4u](#): > > You is the “sentient being” that uses the body for purposes of survival. Gosh it’s amazing the alacrity with which you can slice and dice complex systems. That particular conception seems to me to require sentience being poured into a body from on high. Evolution shows us that awareness, consciousness, sentients are the product of complex organisms interacting with their physical reality. The two aren’t separable. > [@write4u](#): > > Without a brain how is one conscious? Without a body how can one experience consciousness? Heck your wording doesn’t even acknowledge the absolutely intimate and constant feedback loops between body and brain. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2023, 3:45pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/48 "2023-06-28T15:45:37Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > > [@write4u](#): > > > > Without a brain how is one conscious? > > Without a body how can one experience consciousness? > > Heck your wording doesn’t even acknowledge the absolutely intimate and constant feedback loops between body and brain. I see Write4U constantly acknowledging the body and its feedback. I see you plucking the words from one phrase and noting the absence of other words. ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2023, 6:21pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/49 "2023-06-28T18:21:27Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > > [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > > > > [@write4u](#): > > > > > > Without a brain how is one conscious? > > > > Without a body how can one experience consciousness? > > > > Heck your wording doesn’t even acknowledge the absolutely intimate and constant feedback loops between body and brain. > > I see Write4U constantly acknowledging the body and its feedback. I see you plucking the words from one phrase and noting the absence of other words. Nonsense they are fair observations. I see complete thoughts transmitted without any _body/brain produces consciousness_ acknowledged. Same with organisms ~ environment feedback loops. They are fair questions which you’ve gotten good at avoiding because I guess you feel they are beneath you. Lip service isn’t good enough, these notions needs to be absorbed within the fabric of ideas being conveyed. I’ll call it out. ---
**Author:** ![write4u](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/write4u/32/23410_2.png) [@write4u](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/write4u)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 1:51am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/50 "2023-06-29T01:51:23Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > I see complete thoughts transmitted without any _body/brain produces consciousness_ acknowledged. Same with organisms ~ environment feedback loops. > > They are fair questions which you’ve gotten good at avoiding because I guess you feel they are beneath you. Lip service isn’t good enough, these notions needs to be absorbed within the fabric of ideas being conveyed. I’ll call it out. I am sure you are attaching too much meaning to the term **“conscious”** I touched on this when describing single-celled organism having “memory” without having a brain or neural network. It responds strictly to kinetic stresses or biochemical interactions via “microtubules” (which are NOT conscious in and of themselves). Evolution is responsible for the formation of “loop-back” data analysis, at which point consciousness begins to emerge. There is no magic involved. Consciousness is an emergent property of neural patterns, which in turn are formed by microtubule growth and synaptic connections. I like this proposed theory about what consciousness is and how it is acquired. # New Explanation for Consciousness > “In a nutshell, our theory is that consciousness developed as a memory system that is used by our unconscious brain to help us flexibly and creatively imagine the future and plan accordingly,” explained corresponding author Andrew Budson, MD, professor of neurology. “What is completely new about this theory is that it suggests we don’t perceive the world, make decisions, or perform actions directly. Instead, we do all these things unconsciously and then—about half a second later—consciously remember doing them.” > **[New Explanation for Consciousness | Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine](https://www.bumc.bu.edu/camed/2022/10/03/new-explanation-for-consciousness/#)** I only disagree with the statement that “about half a second later we consciously remember”. I believe that this should read "half a second later we become aware of the brain’s loop function and allows our brain to make a “best guess” of what it is “experiencing” and what if anything needs to be done, i.e. the fight or flight response. Until that ability of weighing the incoming data against information in memory (differential equation) via the loop-function is established there is no conscious “expectation” of reality. That comes much later in the evolutionary path, as an extension of “sampling” and comparing incoming data sets against data stored in neural memory patterns (pyramidal neurons) . This is exactly what Seth explains is the case with higher level consciousness. The conscious self-awareness that disappears under aesthetics. **Pyramidal neurons** John M. Bekkers > **Why are they important**? > There are two dominant families of neurons in the cortex, excitatory neurons, which release the neurotransmitter glutamate, and inhibitory neurons, which release g-amino-butyric acid (GABA). > Pyramidal neurons are the most populous members of the excitatory family in the > brain areas they inhabit. They comprise about two-thirds of all neurons in the > mammalian cerebral cortex, **which places them center-stage for many important cognitive processes.** ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/uploads/centerforinquiry/original/3X/d/4/d4f30d3662533c315da4ff56c4a20b1f8d8e39b1.jpeg) _Figure 1. Dendritic morphologies of typical pyramidal neurons in different brain regions._ _(A) Layer 5 pyramidal neuron in the rat somatosensory cortex (courtesy of Maarten Kole)._ _(B) Pyramidal neuron in area CA3 of the rat hippocampus (reproduced with permission from Gonzales et al. (2001)._ _(C) Layer 2 pyramidal neuron in the primary olfactory cortex of the mouse (unpublished work of Norimitsu Suzuki and myself)_ [https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0960-9822(11)01198-5](https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0960-9822%2811%2901198-5) Only when data is processed by the brain does consciousness appear. All other data is unconsciously processed via bio-chemistry. The beauty of chemistry is that it follows mathematically based interactions, which may appear “sentient” but does not need a mathematician to function properly. The physics themselves are processed via a relational value based function. ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/uploads/centerforinquiry/original/3X/e/4/e4e0833a15a1a936d91a62c04870a6c9b8df4431.png) _Schematic depiction of a function described metaphorically as a “machine” or “[black box](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box)” that for each input yields a corresponding output_ > **[Function (mathematics)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_(mathematics))** > > In mathematics, a function from a set X to a set Y assigns to each element of X exactly one element of Y. The set X is called the domain of the function and the set Y is called the codomain of the function. > Functions were originally the idealization of how a varying quantity depends on another quantity. For example, the position of a planet is a function of time. Historically, the concept was elaborated with the infinitesimal calculus at the end of the 17th century, and, until the 19th century, ... ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 4:46am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/51 "2023-06-29T04:46:12Z")
> [@write4u](#): > > Evolution is responsible for the formation of “loop-back” data analysis, at which point consciousness begins to emerge. There is no magic involved. I’ve never said their was magic. There was life! Flesh and blood, and competition & cooperation, ecosystems and action, lots of non-stop action. Life getting on with living is what created these “loop-back” analysis system. Perhaps that the only real difference between us, you’re the mathematician type, you search for answers within number on endless paper (or its modern equivalent). I’m into the flesh and blood, the sensual, passionate pageant of people and creatures in action and in real time. It’s that human perspective that this Earth Centrist perspective is all about, wondering through the countryside absorbing the fact of creatures and plants in constant interaction. Sure people can reduce anything to numbers and data analysis of loop-back incidents, and what not, but that’s not my language. > [@write4u](#): > > Only when data is processed by the brain does consciousness appear. And what is this data that’s being processed? If not, the stuff of interacting with the physical reality around one? Life in action. > [@write4u](#): > > > www.bumc.bu.edu/camed/2022/10/03/new-explanation-for-consciousness/# > > I only disagree with the statement that “about half a second later we consciously remember”. The only thing I disagree with is reading too much into pioneering work. Lots more to be learned about those delays, and what the body/brain is doing during those periods. We can be sure there’ll be more surprises and insights moving forward. ---
**Author:** ![write4u](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/write4u/32/23410_2.png) [@write4u](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/write4u)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 6:31am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/52 "2023-06-29T06:31:43Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > And what is this data that’s being processed? > > If not, the stuff of interacting with the physical reality around one? > Life in action. Yes, why do you assume that one cannot have both perspectives? When giants speak of mathematics as the “language of the Universe”, I don’t question the depth of philosophical understanding of controlled and uncontrolled Dynamism as an underlying causality. “Conscious awareness” is always selectively processing environmental conditions. The selection process is achieved by the loop-back process that compares the stored data of memory with the incoming data and what to select for comparison. **dy·na·mism** , noun > 1. Any of several [philosophical](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=philosophical) theories that attempt to [explain](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=explain) the [universe](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=universe) by an [immanent](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=immanent) [force](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=force). > 1. Great [energy](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=energy), [drive](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=drive), [force](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=force), or [power](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=power); [vigor](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=vigor) of body, mind or personality; [oomph](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=oomph) or [pizzazz](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=pizzazz) > 1. [Dynamic](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=dynamic) reality; active energy; continuous [change](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=change), [progress](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=progress), or [activity](https://oceanhero.today/web?forceDictionary=true&q=activity). # dynamism ## [noun](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun) dy·​na·​mism [ˈdī-nə-ˌmi-zəm](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dynamism?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=d&file=dynami05) [Synonyms of _dynamism_](https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/dynamism) 1 a) philosophy **:** a theory that all [phenomena](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/phenomenon) (such as matter or motion) can be explained as manifestations of force (see [FORCE entry 1 sense 4](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/force#h1)) compare [MECHANISM](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mechanism) b) **:** [DYNAMICS sense 2](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dynamics) population dynamism ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 12:05pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/53 "2023-06-29T12:05:55Z")
> [@write4u](#): > > Yes, why do you assume that one cannot have both perspectives? That. That is a great question. . ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 12:10pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/54 "2023-06-29T12:10:10Z")
> [@write4u](#): > > Yes, why do you assume that one cannot have both perspectives? I think it’s a disingenuous question, because what irritate me and drive me to repeat myself is that you consistently out-shout the perspective I’m trying to convey, even though I don’t dispute any of the science you’ve brought to the table. (You’re self-certain conclusions are another story) I bring up the human struggle with understanding our “human condition” and you dismiss it with microtubules and math. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 12:14pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/55 "2023-06-29T12:14:02Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > I see complete thoughts transmitted without any _body/brain produces consciousness_ acknowledged. Same with organisms ~ environment feedback loops. A pyramidal nueron is part of your body. It’s in your brain, which is most likely where consciousness is created (remembering of course that the brain is connected to the body and gets input from it, i.e. the brain produces consciousness in the same sense the lungs exchange oxygen, they don’t do it alone). Write4U said that, without needing to say “body/brain”. ---
**Author:** ![citizenschallengev4](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/citizenschallengev4/32/28718_2.png) [@citizenschallengev4](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/citizenschallengev4)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2023, 12:47pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/56 "2023-06-29T12:47:07Z")
> [@lausten](#): > > Write4U said that, without needing to say “body/brain”. Perhaps you are wrong about that, perhaps it needs to be said explicitly and repeatedly until it soaks into the general appreciation. Which it most certainly currently not the case, considering how totally oblivious and lost so many human are. It’s especially important to bring into the story when we are discussing humans appreciating their own origin stories, or all those struggling with existential angst, etc. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2023, 11:50am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/57 "2023-06-30T11:50:16Z")
> [@citizenschallengev4](#): > > considering how totally oblivious and lost so many human are. I agree with that. Not so sure saying “body/brain” is the cure. Species only last a few million years, and none of them have an impact on their environment as we have. There isn’t high-tech stuff floating around, or even a beacon from some long-dead advanced civilization to tell us the story of their demise. We have pyramids and denuded islands as clues, that’s it. Maybe if we stopped arguing about the best way to view ourselves, and did the things we know how to do to keep each other alive, we’d last a few extra hundred thousand years. ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [June 30, 2023, 12:14pm UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/58 "2023-06-30T12:14:56Z")
The next one will get into the meat of the question. I’ll start a new thread for that. > **[Why Philosophy Matters - History](http://winter60.blogspot.com/2023/06/why-philosophy-matters-history.html)** > >   I hope I don’t lose too many with that heading. I promise not to list a bunch of dates and Greek names. Philosophy is part of science. I... ---
**Author:** ![lausten](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/lausten/32/23705_2.png) [@lausten](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/lausten)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2023, 4:33am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/59 "2023-07-01T04:33:17Z")
I will follow up tomorrow > **[Why scientists haven’t cracked consciousness](https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2023/6/30/23778870/consciousness-brain-mind-hard-problem-neuroscience-koch-chalmers?fbclid=IwAR1wtcFbXcy0COhqHCt_2bUfzsN7EYjb2Bs3odI5DD-qc2X72IybG0QDimI)** > > The science of consciousness still has no theory. ---
**Author:** ![write4u](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.centerforinquiry.org/write4u/32/23410_2.png) [@write4u](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/u/write4u)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2023, 5:28am UTC](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293/60 "2023-07-01T05:28:08Z")
A very nice article… 👏 [Previous page](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293.md?page=2) [Next page](https://forum.centerforinquiry.org/t/why-philosophy-matters/10293.md?page=4)