Bad Explanations for Consciousness

=== Note that this is a work in progress. ===

Emergence

Some of these proposed explanations talk about “emergence”, but this word (how it is used in theories of consciousness) is not explanatory. This talk of “emergence” is actually an admission of not knowing what is to be explained, yet taking on faith that it is possible to be explained within the metaphysical worldview that the person holds. And this is a problem.

The idea of emergence comes from observations that new behaviors can develop unexpectedly in certain conditions. Careful study actually shows that behaviors do naturally emerge from something when the structure of its materials enables the function. Flight can emerge when an entity possesses a wing structured in the shape of an airfoil. ••• The existence of the required structure does not ensure the behavior emerges, but without the enabling structure, the behavior will (naturally) never exist.

Let us look at an artifact produced out of cognition and consciousness as another example. A paperback book can be described physically as a combination of processed wood fiber, glue and ink. However, these ingredients do not explain the book. The arrangement (especially of the ink on the pages) complies with natural laws, but no explanation using just natural laws can ever account for it. No book will ever emerge naturally from collections of paper and ink. An additional ingredient that is not characteristic of nature is also required: the intelligence of an author. Only when an author structures the words to be printed does the book emerge.

Humans are made up of specialized entities called cells that are each one more unlikely than this universe can account for. The physical and informational structure of cells enables them to function. Life emerges from the deeply integrated structure of the cells. Cells and their existence obviously comply with the laws of nature, but those laws never explain them. Just like books, nothing natural explains cells.

Humans are even more unlikely than “simple” cells because they are multicellular. Finely tuned and deeply integrated systems made out of cells are layered on what was already naturally impossible. These systems are structured to function so that humans can live, work and play. Again, the structure of human beings complies with the laws of nature, but the laws cannot explain why humans exist.

And, humans have consciousness. If consciousness is to emerge physically from nature for humans, there must be structures that enable consciousness function. We know nothing about any such thing either in humans or anything else physical. Consciousness theorists suggest certain parts of human bodies as enabling consciousness, but no consciousness cells or other such structures have ever been verified. Their “emergence” talk then is really is just a statement of hope in their metaphysical worldview, but actually an admission of explanatory cluelessness. The natural world badly fails to answer the question of consciousness.

In fact, there are well-documented cases of humans with completely normal conscious function who are missing substantial parts of their brain, including parts usually associated with consciousness. There are also many well-documented cases of people that have had verified out of body conscious experiences, even while clinically dead physically. Consciousness cannot then be localized to certain physical structures, or even to anything physical.