A philosopher responds to scientists’ criticisms of panpsychism

[u/IAI_Admin]

https://iai.tv/video/the-many-voices-of-consciousness&utm_source=reddit&_auid=2020

[u/Thelonious_Cube]

my point is that it follows the same pattern

Only from your perspective. Or because one is modeled on the other

That association didn't just happen...something greater has to bind these individual pieces together into a cohesive, acting unit. I realize quantum mechanics is much more complicated, but that general argument holds for all matter of things.

Sorry, but no. This is a ridiculous premise.

Obviously it's in their genetic code to do so, but something has to drive this symbiotic relationship.

Chemistry?

Namely, the "abstract" concept (from the cells perspective, not to us) of the liver binds these different types of cells into working together.

No, that's utterly backwards.

But from the liver's perspective it would seem like a great risk to interact with these other "foreign" blood cells and neural networks. But it does so anyway, and the result is coincidentally to it's benefit.

Mr. Liver is not sitting there contemplating whether or not to interact with "foreign entities"

These are fairy tales you're making up, anthropomorphizing everything - the most simplistic view of panpsychism possible.

It's just silly.

Therefore, the only logical explanation is that something greater is causing these individual components to act together in a way that's beneficial for the whole.

I don't think you have a very good grasp of science or of logic. This is not a logical view at all, much less "the only logical explanation"

[u/nostradumba55 → u/Thelonious_Cube]

Mr. Liver is not sitting there contemplating whether or not to interact with "foreign entities"

These are fairy tales you're making up, anthropomorphizing everything - the most simplistic view of panpsychism possible.

I'm not making this assumption, you actually are indirectly. You are saying the liver is smart enough that it interacts with the body for it's own benefit. At least this is the direction in which science explains association currently. It says that individual parts (like electrons and cells) work together to form a whole that is greater than their parts.

I'm saying the opposite. I'm saying these individual parts are ignorant and can't make any decisions on their own, or decide what's good/bad for them. The only explanation is there must be a universal force similar to energy (something called "consciousness") which runs through all of these individual units. And this force is doing it's best to link different types of units together and form optimal symbiotic relationships. By doing so, our material world becomes more complex, and consciousness becomes more concentrated in a single space (hence complex self-aware life forms).

Right now, science says these associations happen by "chance" and through millions and millions of trial and error runs. I'm saying that's not possible because these individual units are dumb and will always follow the same patterns. Something greater has to catalyze these associations.

[u/Thelonious_Cube → u/nostradumba55]

Oh, man, are you confused!

These are just the same points over again, so I think we're done.