36 thoughts on “Does Consciousness Disprove Materialism?”
How is counsciousness an objection to materialism? The fact you even thought of a triangle and why you thought of a triangle at that moment in time, comes from materialism.
materialism makes no sense to me. it sounds too simple. ppl that talk about it a lot act like it explains absolutely evrything. but to me that sounds also too hopeful. because i always thought ppl just cant comprehend certain things and never will. and that this world we live in is beyond our understanding in many ways. and i guess thats okay. nothing can be done about that anyway. people get anxious and want to believe one thing that explains the whole world to them
You’re messing up the analogy because the screen is probably closest In the human sense to drawing a triangle. You can say, I know what a triangle looks like because I can picture it, but no one will believe you until you draw it. Drawing is the same thing as lighting up pixels on the screen, the computers version of the proof.
Our Eternal Consciousness, have Life-side and Stuff-side, it is pictured in the Rainbow, Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo. Instinct, Gravity, Feeling, Intelligence, Intuition, Memory. the three first Basic-Energies, is the Stuff-bearing, but all Mind- and Phys.-Stuff, is compositions of all six. Just short told.
Assumption here is that we need an interface to display of the images. However, it is reasonable that brain could produce thoughts of images without having actual images. Similar to the vivid images we can imagine during our awaking state.
Ai computers Robots they work the same way a human does how ?
They have memory ✅ They have RAm ✅ They have Data ✅ They have Electricity ✅ they do processing and storing information ✅ Neurons firing ✅ Atoms and chemicals ✅ Coding ✅ Same with us humans I mean we have coding we're a code we have one it's called DNA and RNA Bill Gates says it's like the most advanced coding system we didn't reach yet We do neurons firing we do processing we have data memory storing information electricity chemical reactions data stored Same = same The problem is here An AI or a computer or a robot isn't experiencing anything at all it doesn't have free will or inner subjective experience or first person subjective experience to the world it doesn't have inner intent it's not being watched from the inside on its on it doesn't know the taste of redness in red it doesn't know the taste of colors or the taste of feelings it doesn't have free will like we do or that inner subjective experience to the world doesn't experience NDE or Auare Study 1/2/3(soon) You could have the most advanced developed AI robot or computer ever yet they would never have that This is why Qualia and consciousness can't be explained by materalists or science materail measures or theories it's subjective not objective
Materalism is faith ideology not real science Materalism is ideology faith cult a reaction not science beacus as we discussed before science is a tool that depends on us humans and it can be proven wrong it's not the entire truth and there's still so much mysteries science didn't solve beacus it's a tool depends solely on us humans and a tool can't measure itself a ruler can't measure itself people treat science like it's the ultimate truth the ultimate reality meanwhile it's just a tool created used dependent on us humans and we humans lack so much technology humility and passion we're arrogant short sighted narrow minded egoistic narcissistic as humans are we see correlation or connection boom we immediately assume we solved everything and our world is objective just a dead biological machine led by super computer
A lot of people are talking about computers and computer screens as if they mean anything here.
Maybe you think we are similar to a computer with no screen. Okay, fine. After all, a computer still works regardless of whether a screen is attached or not. Or perhaps you think our brains have some sort of built-in screen that we just haven’t found yet. That’s also a possibility.
But none of these arguments get us anywhere closer to solving the actual mystery: How is it even being watched in the first place?
On its own, a computer—with or without a screen—is not experiencing anything at all. You could hook up the most beautiful high-end display to the most advanced computer you can imagine. There’s still not going to be anyone watching it.
Here is the real issue tho Materialists here are completely missing the point answering the wrong question they explained the how but not the who they explain how it works or the mechanism but the real question is WHY THERE IS AN INNER EXPERIENCE AN INNER FIRST PERSON EXPERIENCE AT ALL WHY DOES RED FEELS LIKE RED WHY DOES A STRAWBERRY TASTES LIKE A STRAWBERRY AT ALL WHY DO I FEEL ALIVE ? WHO IS THE OBSERVER ? WHAT IS THE SENSE ? WHAT IS THE EXPERIENCE WHERE DOES EXPERIENCE COME FROM ? they answer the wrog question and they falsely claim we solved qualia but we did not we did not solve the hard problem of consciousness I'm not asking how it works I'm asking who
It exists within reality wholly, only because the thinker themselves exists in reality wholly; it doesn’t exist in a specific pinpointable “space” within your brain, as rather than being an actual static object comprised of atoms, it is a purely mental image of a symbol that your mind is familiar with, to state “where” it exists, I would say it exists within the synapses of the human brain, the supercomputer itself. Amazing thought experiment
The triangle in the computer screen was a sequence of 1's and 0's and those are depended on electrical signals. So the brain also works in the same way using electrical signals.
There is no triangle.💀 Believing that there is a spirit beyond a spirit that is beyond a spirit that is beyond a spirit that is beyond a spirit that is beyond… is a familiar mistake that doesn’t need thousands of years to notice.
It certainly appears like you enjoy positing mystery as something profound. Yes our lack of detailed knowledge about matter circling Pluto leaves room for the possibility that a unicorn is flying around it, but you can deduce reasonably that there is not. As for your computer analogy, you maybe don’t understand computers enough but you can display the triangle without a display. The system will still perform the function and within its logical processors the triangle, for all intents and purposes, will be there. The display is what allows US to interact with it, it isn’t necessary for the computer to perform its functions. So just as you can imagine a triangle without their physically being a triangle, you’re using your memory of a triangle to develop an internal image of one without the physical world replicating your thoughts. Which is easy to understand, since thoughts do not impose themselves on the physical world outside of subsequent actions, but that doesn’t change the fact that they themselves are a product of physical processes.
we are not a computer or a screen tho. if the brain is somewhat computer than what’s there to display it? that’s exactly what consciousness is but its not a material thing. our eyes are not the monitor it would be more on a side of keyboard in computer terms if you want it that way. so then what it is that’s portraying this code of brain?
So many armchair experts here who seem to think the hard problem of consciousness can be trivially answered by ‘conscious experience is just a function of the brain’
Go on then, explain how, even in principle, the electrochemical reactions of millions of neurons could coherently lead to the subjective yet very real experience of, say, seeing the colour red? Or smelling rose petals?
It’s not a trivial problem, nor can you handwave it away by invoking the complexity of the brain.
The screen displays the triangle based on the data stored within the computer. The triangle physically exists as data. Likewise, dreams physically exist as certain neurons firing in your brain. There is no percievable triangle others can see with their eyes alone. The data is stored in your brain and then translated to output a shape. However, with the right technology and prodding, you're able to intercept this data and display the triangle perhaps on another screen elsewhere.
Triangles are “seen” because the visual cortex is conjuring up that image based on information it has received from the eye. Dreams, hallucinations and even vivid memories are the visual cortex conjuring up images without information being received from the eye. The visual cortex can often misinterpret information from the eye as well, hence the research showing eyewitness testimony can be problematic.
The most stupidest questions you could ask that has nothing to do nor with thinking nor with understanding. Trying to find a place that generates an image… most have nothing interesting to think about.
The issue is in my opinion, that we connect dreams into a state of unconsciousness. However we have scientific evidence that it’s not true.
The question could be: Do you dream when you’re deep under general anesthesia?
So one could argue that sleeping, closing eyes, and anesthesia are different levels of brain umbrella activity.
And a person’s brain activity is not confined to physical things. You can be born deaf, blind, and physically impaired, but still have consciousness. And a robot can have cameras, microphones, receivers, and still would be unconscious.
Consciousness is the ability to model the self and the world, in a coherent sense, which keeps the system’s identity in the same existential state or improve its chances of survival. In case of natural systems, reproduction also plays a fundamental role.
The problem, as I see it, is that many people either cannot understand—or simply refuse to understand—that words themselves have no intrinsic or inheritable value. A word is just a sound, a mark, a symbol. Its only power is the IDEA it manages to convey in the moment of understanding. Nothing more.
This is why debates get stuck. People argue over terms instead of truths. They defend vocabulary instead of meaning.
For that reason, I think we should set aside the usual “materialism vs. consciousness” framing. Those words carry too much baggage and too little clarity. A better way to speak about the same reality is through structure and function.
Structure and function are never separate. One is never without the other, even when our attention is fixed on only one side. They are two faces of a single unfolding reality. The IDEA behind them is not static—it is an ever‑unfolding discovery, a continual finding, a delight in the mystery of the IMPOSSIBLE and the Unknowable becoming possible and known within time.
That is the real wonder: How many ways can the same ONE IDEA present itself to the limited human mind, each time as a fresh experience?
Reality keeps revealing itself in new forms because our capacity is limited. The Infinite meets us where we are. The ONE IDEA keeps expressing itself again and again, each time in a way we can bear, each time in a way that expands us just a little more.
Words don’t hold that mystery. IDEAS do. And the IDEA keeps coming—structure and function, form and activity, the seen and the unseen—one truth, endlessly refracted into human understanding.
Things exist, even a dream is a real dream, it's reality is not what it appears as, but the underlying substance. Whatever is allowing things to appear, is their substance, their essential reality.
If you make things out of clay or gold, they don't stop being clay or gold, yet there is still an experience of a gold ring or a pot or bowl.
The computer game has a reality, it can be experienced, and yet, we know it's code and electricity and more.
If the substance had no form of its own, if it was pure potentiality, pure intelligence, pure energy, and yet anything could be made from it, the forms would be more apparent than the substance, the forms are appearing, but their reality would be that of this substance, as in that is what allows them to exist.
Can you differentiate your consciousness from what it perceives? Meaning, can you find an actual separation? The material world can exist alongside a formless consciousness, one perspective is that the formless is the substance of the material world.
How is counsciousness an objection to materialism? The fact you even thought of a triangle and why you thought of a triangle at that moment in time, comes from materialism.
materialism makes no sense to me. it sounds too simple. ppl that talk about it a lot act like it explains absolutely evrything. but to me that sounds also too hopeful. because i always thought ppl just cant comprehend certain things and never will. and that this world we live in is beyond our understanding in many ways. and i guess thats okay. nothing can be done about that anyway. people get anxious and want to believe one thing that explains the whole world to them
You’re messing up the analogy because the screen is probably closest In the human sense to drawing a triangle. You can say, I know what a triangle looks like because I can picture it, but no one will believe you until you draw it. Drawing is the same thing as lighting up pixels on the screen, the computers version of the proof.
Our Eternal Consciousness, have Life-side and Stuff-side,
it is pictured in the Rainbow,
Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo.
Instinct, Gravity, Feeling, Intelligence, Intuition, Memory.
the three first Basic-Energies, is the Stuff-bearing,
but all Mind- and Phys.-Stuff, is compositions of all six.
Just short told.
Assumption here is that we need an interface to display of the images. However, it is reasonable that brain could produce thoughts of images without having actual images. Similar to the vivid images we can imagine during our awaking state.
Consciousness is just subtler matter
Here's the real issue tho
Ai computers Robots they work the same way a human does how ?
They have memory ✅
They have RAm ✅
They have Data ✅
They have Electricity ✅ they do processing and storing information ✅
Neurons firing ✅
Atoms and chemicals ✅
Coding ✅
Same with us humans I mean we have coding we're a code we have one it's called DNA and RNA Bill Gates says it's like the most advanced coding system we didn't reach yet
We do neurons firing we do processing we have data memory storing information electricity chemical reactions data stored
Same = same
The problem is here
An AI or a computer or a robot isn't experiencing anything at all it doesn't have free will or inner subjective experience or first person subjective experience to the world it doesn't have inner intent it's not being watched from the inside on its on it doesn't know the taste of redness in red it doesn't know the taste of colors or the taste of feelings it doesn't have free will like we do or that inner subjective experience to the world doesn't experience NDE or Auare Study 1/2/3(soon)
You could have the most advanced developed AI robot or computer ever yet they would never have that
This is why Qualia and consciousness can't be explained by materalists or science materail measures or theories it's subjective not objective
Materalism is faith ideology not real science
Materalism is ideology faith cult a reaction not science beacus as we discussed before science is a tool that depends on us humans and it can be proven wrong it's not the entire truth and there's still so much mysteries science didn't solve beacus it's a tool depends solely on us humans and a tool can't measure itself a ruler can't measure itself people treat science like it's the ultimate truth the ultimate reality meanwhile it's just a tool created used dependent on us humans and we humans lack so much technology humility and passion we're arrogant short sighted narrow minded egoistic narcissistic as humans are we see correlation or connection boom we immediately assume we solved everything and our world is objective just a dead biological machine led by super computer
You call yourself a philosopher? Do some more research.
A lot of people are talking about computers and computer screens as if they mean anything here.
Maybe you think we are similar to a computer with no screen. Okay, fine. After all, a computer still works regardless of whether a screen is attached or not. Or perhaps you think our brains have some sort of built-in screen that we just haven’t found yet. That’s also a possibility.
But none of these arguments get us anywhere closer to solving the actual mystery: How is it even being watched in the first place?
On its own, a computer—with or without a screen—is not experiencing anything at all. You could hook up the most beautiful high-end display to the most advanced computer you can imagine. There’s still not going to be anyone watching it.
Here is the real issue tho
Materialists here are completely missing the point answering the wrong question they explained the how but not the who they explain how it works or the mechanism but the real question is WHY THERE IS AN INNER EXPERIENCE AN INNER FIRST PERSON EXPERIENCE AT ALL WHY DOES RED FEELS LIKE RED WHY DOES A STRAWBERRY TASTES LIKE A STRAWBERRY AT ALL WHY DO I FEEL ALIVE ? WHO IS THE OBSERVER ? WHAT IS THE SENSE ? WHAT IS THE EXPERIENCE WHERE DOES EXPERIENCE COME FROM ? they answer the wrog question and they falsely claim we solved qualia but we did not we did not solve the hard problem of consciousness I'm not asking how it works I'm asking who
Não ingnore a mecânica quântica nem físicos teórico ganhador de nobel roger penrose
A inteligência está na consciência e não no cérebro nem em neurônios
Cientistas não entende de consciência entende de cérebro ou neurônios
Verdade
Somos corpos físicos podres que fica a consciência continua e não é biológico é quântica e não está no
It exists within reality wholly, only because the thinker themselves exists in reality wholly; it doesn’t exist in a specific pinpointable “space” within your brain, as rather than being an actual static object comprised of atoms, it is a purely mental image of a symbol that your mind is familiar with, to state “where” it exists, I would say it exists within the synapses of the human brain, the supercomputer itself. Amazing thought experiment
The triangle in the computer screen was a sequence of 1's and 0's and those are depended on electrical signals. So the brain also works in the same way using electrical signals.
Do you think of a ghost as a diaphanous, free floating consciousness? Probably a consciousness that once was corporeal, now lives in a closet.
Consciousness is a completely unique concept of the universe. It is like a completely different force on its own, when you THINK about it. Get it?
There is no triangle.💀
Believing that there is a spirit beyond a spirit that is beyond a spirit that is beyond a spirit that is beyond a spirit that is beyond… is a familiar mistake that doesn’t need thousands of years to notice.
It certainly appears like you enjoy positing mystery as something profound. Yes our lack of detailed knowledge about matter circling Pluto leaves room for the possibility that a unicorn is flying around it, but you can deduce reasonably that there is not. As for your computer analogy, you maybe don’t understand computers enough but you can display the triangle without a display. The system will still perform the function and within its logical processors the triangle, for all intents and purposes, will be there. The display is what allows US to interact with it, it isn’t necessary for the computer to perform its functions. So just as you can imagine a triangle without their physically being a triangle, you’re using your memory of a triangle to develop an internal image of one without the physical world replicating your thoughts. Which is easy to understand, since thoughts do not impose themselves on the physical world outside of subsequent actions, but that doesn’t change the fact that they themselves are a product of physical processes.
we are not a computer or a screen tho. if the brain is somewhat computer than what’s there to display it? that’s exactly what consciousness is but its not a material thing. our eyes are not the monitor it would be more on a side of keyboard in computer terms if you want it that way. so then what it is that’s portraying this code of brain?
The computer analogy works fine it think
So many armchair experts here who seem to think the hard problem of consciousness can be trivially answered by ‘conscious experience is just a function of the brain’
Go on then, explain how, even in principle, the electrochemical reactions of millions of neurons could coherently lead to the subjective yet very real experience of, say, seeing the colour red? Or smelling rose petals?
It’s not a trivial problem, nor can you handwave it away by invoking the complexity of the brain.
The screen displays the triangle based on the data stored within the computer. The triangle physically exists as data. Likewise, dreams physically exist as certain neurons firing in your brain. There is no percievable triangle others can see with their eyes alone. The data is stored in your brain and then translated to output a shape. However, with the right technology and prodding, you're able to intercept this data and display the triangle perhaps on another screen elsewhere.
Near-death experiences as well
Triangles are “seen” because the visual cortex is conjuring up that image based on information it has received from the eye. Dreams, hallucinations and even vivid memories are the visual cortex conjuring up images without information being received from the eye. The visual cortex can often misinterpret information from the eye as well, hence the research showing eyewitness testimony can be problematic.
Your conscious experience is only the tip of the iceberg, yet it's the eye of the storm
Yes I agree with the comments it is a bit silly lol
The most stupidest questions you could ask that has nothing to do nor with thinking nor with understanding. Trying to find a place that generates an image… most have nothing interesting to think about.
The issue is in my opinion, that we connect dreams into a state of unconsciousness. However we have scientific evidence that it’s not true.
The question could be: Do you dream when you’re deep under general anesthesia?
So one could argue that sleeping, closing eyes, and anesthesia are different levels of brain umbrella activity.
And a person’s brain activity is not confined to physical things. You can be born deaf, blind, and physically impaired, but still have consciousness. And a robot can have cameras, microphones, receivers, and still would be unconscious.
Consciousness is the ability to model the self and the world, in a coherent sense, which keeps the system’s identity in the same existential state or improve its chances of survival. In case of natural systems, reproduction also plays a fundamental role.
The problem, as I see it, is that many people either cannot understand—or simply refuse to understand—that words themselves have no intrinsic or inheritable value. A word is just a sound, a mark, a symbol. Its only power is the IDEA it manages to convey in the moment of understanding. Nothing more.
This is why debates get stuck. People argue over terms instead of truths. They defend vocabulary instead of meaning.
For that reason, I think we should set aside the usual “materialism vs. consciousness” framing. Those words carry too much baggage and too little clarity. A better way to speak about the same reality is through structure and function.
Structure and function are never separate. One is never without the other, even when our attention is fixed on only one side. They are two faces of a single unfolding reality. The IDEA behind them is not static—it is an ever‑unfolding discovery, a continual finding, a delight in the mystery of the IMPOSSIBLE and the Unknowable becoming possible and known within time.
That is the real wonder:
How many ways can the same ONE IDEA present itself to the limited human mind, each time as a fresh experience?
Reality keeps revealing itself in new forms because our capacity is limited. The Infinite meets us where we are. The ONE IDEA keeps expressing itself again and again, each time in a way we can bear, each time in a way that expands us just a little more.
Words don’t hold that mystery.
IDEAS do.
And the IDEA keeps coming—structure and function, form and activity, the seen and the unseen—one truth, endlessly refracted into human understanding.
Things exist, even a dream is a real dream, it's reality is not what it appears as, but the underlying substance.
Whatever is allowing things to appear, is their substance, their essential reality.
If you make things out of clay or gold, they don't stop being clay or gold, yet there is still an experience of a gold ring or a pot or bowl.
The computer game has a reality, it can be experienced, and yet, we know it's code and electricity and more.
If the substance had no form of its own, if it was pure potentiality, pure intelligence, pure energy, and yet anything could be made from it, the forms would be more apparent than the substance, the forms are appearing, but their reality would be that of this substance, as in that is what allows them to exist.
Can you differentiate your consciousness from what it perceives?
Meaning, can you find an actual separation?
The material world can exist alongside a formless consciousness, one perspective is that the formless is the substance of the material world.
Consciousness is 100% material. There’s nothing supernatural about it.
Not just a JRE, but a JRE plus something else going on under the hood. Just wait until you folks understand one day