THAT WHICH IS ALIVE OR CONSCIOUS IN US AND THE BODY
There is consciousness, and there is self-consciousness. As it is established, they are not one and the same thing.
A number of contemporary scientists put the sign of equality between energy, matter, and consciousness, and so they say that each and every thing in the universe has consciousness.
Furthermore, some of them see consciousness as “the ground of all being” and, accordingly, recognize it in any chemical reaction involving a couple of chemical elements. Physicist David Bohm was explicit: “The ability of form to be active is the most significant feature of mind, and we have something that is mind-like already with the electron.” (By the way, in this case, mind is a poor choice of words.)
Indeed, one can acknowledge the radiation of the Sun (light) as a signal or information meaning “I am here.” And we can respond to that information in a number of ways – as you know, we “communicate” with the Sun on a daily basis and many things in our lives depend on how well we understand its messages.
An earthquake is a signal, an indicator of certain movements in the Earth’s crust and can also be a clear message: “My friend, that house of yours was not properly built!” But, is the Earth aware of that message? …Or, perhaps, the Sun? In both cases we are, in fact, talking about ordinary chemical/physical reactions which produce further reactions within us.
And unlike the Earth, or the Sun, we are aware or can become aware of their and our (re)actions. Just as any mono-cellular being can. Namely, if you expose an amoeba to some benign external influence, it will respond to it in its own way. However, if that influence is regularly repeated with the same intensity, the amoeba will gradually stop reacting – it has become aware of the harmlessness of that influence. Contrary to that, a chemical reaction between two or more elements will always happen in exactly the same way if the conditions are the same.
Hence, it turns out that consciousness has (no less than) two “levels”: “chemical” and “biochemical”. Of course, the latter has something to do or depends on the former, because it is known that life itself is founded on chemical reactions. Still, there is an evident distinction! The appearance of biochemical consciousness is inseparably connected to the appearance of life. It is true that living & non-living matter are not separate substances, but isn’t it also true that it is only so in the living beings?!
So, what is it that connects all life on this planet? The answer has been known for some time – DNA.
The macro-molecules of DNA, or at least RNA, have been recognized as the only real, visible creators of life and carriers of hereditary information, and they are found in everything that lives on Earth. Therefore, that which is alive in humans is the same as that which is alive in a dog, butterfly, or an oak. The length of the DNA chain (the number of genes) is the only thing that separates species from one another. The more similar the species, the more similar the DNA is.
In other words, genes contain the key information which creates life forms and enables them to stay alive and to grow. And, as soon as the word information is mentioned, it is understood that we speak about consciousness as well. Thus, it is obvious that DNA (genes) is the source, or, more precisely, the carrier of consciousness. This initial, elementary biochemical consciousness produces the “first” cell, and the consciousness of that cell is the source of consciousness for all other cells in a body.
|
Key fact: In order to become “conscious”, consciousness requires a living body. |
Yet, at this moment, it is very important to understand that a cell becomes conscious or aware of the environment, or itself, through its membrane, not DNA! Genes are “only” the instructions manual for production of the membrane (and the spine, eye, lung… – the complete body).
And that is how (or when) self-consciousness appears. There is no self-consciousness without the body. And, of course, the body itself does not depend on its “personal” information – a body is just a body – you can name it whatever you like.
That which is alive or conscious in us “knows” that it is alive and conscious thanks to the body, but is not the body itself.
It is easy to prove. We can have almost any part of our head corrected or operated, thus completely changing our physical appearance, but I is unchanged. This intervention may affect our behaviour or personality, but the essence of our being stays intact. It is neither prettier, nor uglier than it was before “the nose job”.
Similarly, when we lose a leg or any other (not vital) part of the body in an accident, our self-consciousness or experience of ourselves, is almost always altered, but that which is alive or aware in us is not damaged in any way. It remains the same even when our heart, liver, or a kidney is replaced with another, matching one.
The body that we have now we did not have when we were conceived although we “had” the elementary consciousness which would eventually generate it and bring into being. Nevertheless, there is no qualitative difference between the (initial) awareness of the first cell and the awareness of the complete body: that which is alive in a zygote is identical to that which is alive in a new-born baby. “It” is not affected by the body in which it “resides”. You can call it I, the soul, god… but remember: these are just empty words invented by human beings, without any real meaning.
The “elementary consciousness” which is immanent to all living beings cannot be named or described by any words.
***
Even if scientists succeeded in recreating conditions that led to the origin of life (if they haven’t already), it would mean very little, if anything at all, because, you know, it could have happened in that way, but it didn’t have to. And, ironically, most people would hail it as an uncontested proof that it takes Someone (God) to create life.
There is this bunch of people called creationists (distinguished members of the religious majority which rules the world we live in) who promote the “teaching” which says that universe and life are results of supernatural acts of divine creation. Here are some representative pieces of that teaching obtained from their books and articles:
- “The universe in which we live is a secret. It is a miracle of God’s creation.”
- “Human speech is a secret – it is a gift from God, a miracle.”
- “So far, we have failed to understand why that happened.” [The enlargement of the cerebral cortex] “Could it be that man was created like that?”…
Clearly, if nothing else, the conclusions are consistent – these people haven’t got the faintest idea of what they are talking about, but they are sure that it was created that way, that God did it for some reason.
And this is how the assumption of creation is “proved”: first, some life form, let’s say a lion, is described in detail by using scientific methods and learning; then admiration towards its perfection, function, and beauty is expressed; and finally a victorious announcement is made: “All that cannot result from pure coincidence. It is the evidence of creation. It is the act of an omnipotent and intelligent creator.”!
However, the problem is that there is no evidence – it was not provided. All we have here is a supposition. It may be more logical than the one asserting that life appeared by accidence, but it does not have to be more truthful. Logical ≠ true. Let me tell you a story:
Long time ago, a man called Aristotle saw two stones, one weighing approximately 2 kilos and the other which weighed only 200 grams, lying on the ground. Without any doubt, he immediately concluded that, if dropped from a 20-meter-tall building at the same time, the heavier stone would hit the ground sooner than the lighter one. Logical, isn’t it?
For many centuries Aristotle’s conclusion was considered to be the absolute truth. But, then, a man called Galileo took two stones of different weight in his hands, simultaneously dropped them from some building, and undoubtedly proved that Aristotle’s conclusion was false – both stones hit the ground at the same time.
Brainteaser:
How is it possible that today Aristotle has much more “likes” and followers than Galileo?
*
There is no such thing as unintelligent life. The greatest miracle that has ever happened on Earth is the triumph of Darwin’s theory of evolution.