Home Discussion Forum Where do you draw the line when it comes to consciousness and...

Where do you draw the line when it comes to consciousness and living things?

Is a human conscious? a gorrilla? a dog? a fish? a single-celled organism? a virus? a rock?

5 COMMENTS

  1. I’m nowhere near an expert, so I follow what science says in general. As for a virus, it’s barely considered a living thing much less “conscious”
    a rock? oh boy…

  2. No expert, but there are certainly different levels of consciousness. I know that humans and animals are conscious, but not on the same level. I’m not sure of the brain of a fish. A rock is definitely not conscious.

  3. My idea of consciousness is something that knows of its own existence. Therefore a human or animal such as a gorilla, dog or fish is conscious. a virus would not be, neither is a single celled organims, or a rock. but i do not believe it i wroung for a conscious being to suffer. as long as it is for a valid purpose.
    However generaly speaking we have to draw the line in terms of consciouness, where society as a whole thinks best.
    Therefore we can only treat beings correctly when they are deemed “conscious” by the majority.
    This is a problem we are going to face very soon as computers will become more intelligent than humans, and may develop conciousness of self being, but this shouldnt realisticly happen for around another 20 years.
    anyway why do we have to draw the line of consciousness why cant we just treat conscious beings like unconsious objects. It might be inhumain, but that feeling is only key to our surival as we evolved, trying to unite humans to help them surive. However we now apply that feeling to anything consious such as intensive chicken farming, but im not denying that that sense of humanity will be benificial to the human race.
    What is consciousness?, why am i me?, am i just a program?
    should i not think in terms of “i”? should i not care about myself? should i be selfless? should everyone else?
    People say life is a gift to be treasured not to be enjured.
    but, in fact, to be conscious, is meaningless.
    srry about that wierd philosophy i just spewed over this page

  4. The use of ‘consciousness’ is part of the problem. A variety of creatures have an awareness for themselves. Most creatures can be shown to have a fear for their own lives — being conscious or aware of their morality.
    Any insect or animal that scurries away from a human but not another insect or animal is demonstrating a fear for life. By extension, they are conscious.

  5. All lines are arbitrary. One of the first principles of Buddha awareness is that it is all one. My studies of physics tells me that matter is probably wrinkles in the space-time continuum therefore everything is connected in that manner. We do not know whether or not there is consciousness in a single celled organism. It lacks the ability to communicate its feelings and awareness to us, or perhaps we lack the ability to perceive its communications. I have often thought it is possible that the cosmos itself is conscious of itself and this may be what theists are referring to when they refer to God. These are merely my own speculations. What do you think?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related