I was reading a article in the on-line Aeon Magazine this morning called, “By the light of Brahman”.
Its first assertion was that Brahman is the universal consciousness which comprises everything and that our individual consciousnesses are local instantiations of Brahman which are immanent in all living things as Atman, the individual ego or self.
I’ve often reflected that we, recently evolved creatures that we are, do not like the simple fact that we are mortal and transitory. And, to ameliorate the inherent meaninglessness of this situation, we tend to favor explanatory scenarios in which “it isn’t so”.
And the idea that our Atman consciousnesses are simply small local reflections of a universal Brahman consciousness ensures, and assures us, that we are part of something greater and more meaningful.
Am I suspicious? Yes.
As the article continued, it broached the subject of David Chalmer’s 1995 “Hard Problem” of consciousness.
In the article, it says:
“The hard problem emerges when we try to explain what it’s like to have a conscious experience of a tree.”
I found myself thinking that the fact that we can ask a question does not create a requirement that the question must have an answer. I could, for example, ask, “What does a square circle look like?”
But, in spite of that quibble with Chalmer’s Hard Problem, I think the deeper answer, or more telling resolution, lies elsewhere.
We can imagine that, over time in evolution, the adaptations, born of survival of the fittest contests, grow more and more complex and continue to replace or layer over each other.
And we can project this vision of gathering complexity into the future and imagine the creation of ever more complex creatures, as millions and millions of years pass, until we, ourselves, have finally arisen.
But, the fact that we can imagine a general principle repeating like that does not mean that we can understand a specific instantiation of the principle after many, many repeats.
I wrote a poem sometime ago on this subject. It goes like this:
That which can imagine things
is ever so much less
than that which evolved to allow it to
imagine things.
Consider the 3.5 billion years of evolution
which created all the machinery and complexity
that allows you to have even the smallest
self-awareness that you exist.
gallagher
25Jul23
Stockholm
If you touch your forefinger to the tip of your nose (go ahead and do it now) it seems very easy; the simplest thing ever.
But in truth you have little or no idea of all the invisible complexity that automatically came into play within your brain and body, and below any conscious awareness of yours, to accomplish that small feat.
In the same way, Chalmer’s question about what it’s like to have a conscious experience is far, far beyond our ken. Thus, just because we can pose a question like that does not mean we can answer it.