Home Discussion Forum Is human consciousness an oxygenated Universal fluke, or the eventual corollary of...

Is human consciousness an oxygenated Universal fluke, or the eventual corollary of the evolutionary journey?

I do NOT give TD’s; I thank you all for your answers.


  1. What the hell is an ‘oxygenated universal fluke’?
    Given that humans are themselves something of a ‘fluke’ as with anything evolutionary, presumably ‘human consciousness’ would be also.
    As for whether ‘consciousness’ more generally is a necessary eventuality of evolution, that entirely depends on how you define ‘consciousness’. As far as I see it, ‘human consciousness’ is simply a way we choose to describe part of how the human nervous system processes information.

  2. The conscious awareness was always primary, and the evolutionary development secondary. There would never have been any world if there was to be nothing to observe it. Awareness is the only evidence of existence.
    If you try to really understand the meaning of this statement, you will find much more than you were looking for.

  3. Without watching your vid, I can say my opinion is that it’s one end of the evolutionary journey. Whether it is the final end, you and I may never know.
    The great anthropologist/naturalist Loren Eiseley called it “The Immense Journey” as the title of one of his books. He used the phrase in reference to an imaginary character, who would have existed in real life: the first man to look up at the stars and feel the loneliness of being on a planet without knowing what all of that space above him was for. Eisely asked the question whether or not that individual could possibly have known the “immense journey” his species was set to go on.

  4. There’s no answers in space. I don’t know what you mean by an oxygenated fluke. Consciousness isn’t just a by-product but is just the opposite. Consciousness is the purpose for everything

  5. Possibly the most challenging and pervasive source of problems in the whole of philosophy. Our own consciousness seems to be the most basic fact confronting us, yet it is almost impossible to say what consciousness is. Is mine like yours? Is ours like that of animals? Might machines come to have consciousness? Is it possible for there to be disembodied consciousness? Whatever complex biological and neural processes go on backstage, it is my consciousness that provides the theatre where my experiences and thoughts have their existence, where my desires are felt and where my intentions are formed. But then how am I to conceive the ‘I’, or self that is the spectator, or at any rate the owner of this theatre? These problems together make up what is sometimes called ‘the hard problem’ of consciousness. One of the difficulties in thinking about consciousness is that the problems seem not to be scientific ones; Leibniz remarked that if we could construct a machine that could think and feel, and blow it up to the size of a mill and thus be able to examine its working parts as thoroughly as we pleased, we would still not find consciousness (Monadology, para. 17), and drew the conclusion that consciousness resides in simple subjects, not complex ones. Even if we are convinced that consciousness somehow emerges from the complexity of brain functioning, we may still feel baffled about the way the emergence takes place, or why it takes place in just the way it does.
    The nature of conscious experience has been the largest single obstacle to physicalism, behaviourism, and functionalism in the philosophy of mind: these are all views that according to their opponents, can only be believed by feigning permanent anaesthesia. But many philosophers are convinced that we can divide and conquer: we may make progress not by thinking of one ‘hard’ problem, but by breaking the subject up into different skills and recognizing that rather than a single self or observer we would do better to think of a relatively undirected whirl of cerebral activity, with no inner theatre, no inner lights, and above all no inner spectator.

  6. What? I think I’ll go with ‘eventual outcome of evolution.’ Humans aren’t the only animals who have conciousness/self-awareness.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here