AN EXPLORATION OF CONCEPTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS

The current definition of consciousness is:

The state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings : she failed to regain consciousness and
died two days later.
the awareness or perception of something by a person : her acute consciousness of Mike's presence.
the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world : consciousness emerges from the
operations of the brain.
New Oxford American Dictionary
Consciousness is a term that has been used to refer to a variety of aspects of the relationship between
the mind and the world with which it interacts. It has been defined, at one time or another, as:
subjective experience; awareness; the ability to experience feelings; wakefulness; having a sense of
selfhood; or as the executive control system of the mind. Despite the difficulty of definition, many
philosophers believe that there is a basic underlying intuition about consciousness that is shared by
nearly all people. As Max Velmans and Susan Schneider wrote in The Blackwell Companion to
Consciousness:
"Anything that we are aware of at a given moment forms part of our consciousness, making conscious
experience at once the most familiar and most mysterious aspect of our lives."
Wikipedia
And then there is the idea of collective unconscious, developed by Carl Jung:
Collective unconscious is a term of analytical psychology, coined by Carl Jung. It is proposed to be a
part of the unconscious mind, expressed in humanity and all life forms with nervous systems, and
describes how the structure of the psyche autonomously organizes experience. Jung distinguished the
collective unconscious from the personal unconscious, in that the personal unconscious is a personal
reservoir of experience unique to each individual, while the collective unconscious collects and
organizes those personal experiences in a similar way with each member of a particular species.
Wikipedia
A crucial aspect of consciousness is that it is not a physically palpable entity, like a table or a
cat. In this lies the problem; even in discussing abstract concepts like time and space we are
able to define their elements with the tool of mathematics. With other abstract emotional
concepts like love, hate, jealousy, anger etc. which are associated with the human and
animal condition we are also able to assign a reasonably understood physical value to them,
even if it is only on a microscopic level in the alteration of neural synapses in the brain. Or in
an actual physical example: he was angry because his football team lost and so he threw his
cap into the river. With consciousness though, there does not seem to be these subtleties.
You are either conscious - alive, awake and able to communicate or dead and unable to
communicate. Perhaps the closest other phenomenon is gravity - you either step off the top
of a building and float or plummet to the ground. Its either there or not. The only in between
aspects are being unconscious through physical trauma and sleep. In both of these cases the
brain remains in a state of suspended activity in which automatic body functions are
maintained.
The definition is further complicated by descriptions of states of elevated consciousness
and altered consciousness. If we do not have an absolute definition of something, how can
we know if it has been elevated or altered? Or could it be that like a table which has had

its legs shortened, it stays a table but would only be able to function as
such in strictly defined conditions - as a childs table?
So it would seem that being conscious and consciousness are
two different aspects of being.
In attempting to make sense of this concept, perhaps we should start
with the current theory which underlies our existence. At the beginning,
the big bang the origin of the known universe where an infinitesimal point
of energy inflated and expanded and then cooled over a period of over some
14 billion years, eventually coalescing into the current observable universe of
galaxies, stars and planets.
Under immense pressure and heat, various physical elements were formed, eventually
becoming the components of animate and inanimate matter.
Perhaps we should attempt to define the physical universe before attempting to define a
considered element of it.
Perhaps also we should attempt to define our definitions. It is obvious that the physical
universe of mineral matter existed before the emergence of plant and animal forms. In most
traditional descriptions of creation this is also the format. In defining plant and animal forms
we say that they are alive although they emerged into this world from dead matter. So in
discussing consciousness it could be crucial to define the exact event at which mineral
matter became plant matter. But why did some mineral matter become plant matter and
some stay mineral? And what part of this primal soup became cellular, the precursor to the
animal kingdom?

Alive
adjective [ predic. ]
1 (of a person, animal, or plant) living, not dead : hopes of finding anyone still alive were fading | he
was kept alive by a feeding-tube.
(of a feeling or quality) continuing in existence : keeping hope alive.
continuing to be supported or in use : militarism was kept alive by pure superstition.
2 (of a person or animal) alert and active; animated : Ken comes alive when he hears his music
played.
figurative having interest and meaning : we hope we will make history come alive for the children.
3 ( alive to) aware of and interested in; responsive to : always alive to new ideas.
THE RIGHT WORD
Dead is dead, but one can be alive to varying degrees. The broadest of these terms describing what has
life or shows signs of having it, alive can refer to what barely exists (: he was unconscious but still
alive when they found him) as well as to what is bursting with (literal or figurative) life (: her face was
alive with excitement and anticipation).
Living, on the other hand, is more limited in scope and implies the condition of not being dead (: at 92,
she was the oldest living member of the family) or a state of continued existence or activity (:
America's greatest living historian).
Animate has fewer connotations than living or alive; though rare, it is used to distinguish living
organisms as opposed to dead ones (: one of the few animate creatures after the devastating
explosion).

Animated, on the other hand, is used to describe inanimate things to which life or the appearance of
life has been given (: an animated cartoon), or things that are vigorous and lively (: an animated
debate on the death penalty).
Anything that is essential to life is vital (: vital functions; vital organs), but vital can also be used to
describe the energy, activity, and alertness of living things (: an aging but vital member of the
historical society).
New Oxford American Dictionary
We dont refer to minerals as being alive. But what are the instruments which we use to
define alive? And to obtain a reading on those mechanistic instruments we require the
transfer of packets of information; the beat of a heart is transmitted from the alive patient via
the mechanism of an electrocardiograph machine to a sheet of paper; in a similar way that
packets of information are transferred through our sensory organs - eyes, nose, hearing,
touch and even taste when two humans become aware of each other.
Even though we dont consider mineral structures like crystals to be alive they nevertheless
do grow and replicate.
Inorganic matter, if free to take that physical state in which it is most stable, tends to crystallize. There
is no practical limit to the size a crystal may attain under the right conditions, and selenite single
crystals in excess of 10 m are found in the Cave of the Crystals in Naica, Mexico.
Wikipedia
So could simply occupying space be considered being alive? Could alive be thought of as
being a self-sustaining system? And would self-replicating be a necessary part of the
definition?
So is a wooden table a self-sustaining system/entity? I would say yes. Not self-replicating,
but once assembled is to a significant degree self-sustaining in that it maintains itself,
maintains form and structure, (perhaps unconsciously or non-consciously) as an individual
entity. Yes, this individuality has been embodied in it by a third party (the carpenter) but could
this embodying be considered to be imparting elements of life in that it contains design
structures (thoughts) of its maker, the carpenter and so conveys images or emotions to the
viewer/user in the same way that a painting may? One could perhaps argue that the same
system prevails concerning humans, in that we are the result of specific molecular material
and genetic patterns which assemble, albeit automatically. But paradoxically, though we are
of far greater structural complexity, no extra actual designing is needed to be incorporated
into producing the end product; we have reproduced as part of an entrenched system of
negentropy, an increasing in order. Only now through DNA research is there some factor of
individual design input feasible. Conversely the table is in a state of entropy, a decreasing
state of order; it will eventually rot and crumble, losing its identity as a table.
A brain-dead human in a hospital bed on life-support systems is considered to be alive, but
lacking the ability to naturally self-replicate and to maintain itself in a specific structure where
its system does not breakdown into entropy.
Lacking the self-support systems, analyses of the brain dead human and the table would be
synonymous; the one, the human, will be more complex in structural design, but both will
slowly degrade into their base components and their individualities will collapse. The table no
longer a part of a chain in a live system - a forest, a tree, because that is part of its historical
continuum, and the body no longer part of a sophisticated self-replicating species.

The New Oxford American Dictionary gives the definition - consciousness emerges from the
operations of the brain.
So it would seem that in the accepted sense, consciousness is unique to living animals, a
prerequisite being a fully functioning brain, or central processing unit, with a more complex
interaction in humans and decreasing in complexity as we go down to single cell structure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
The other prerequisite would seem to be a range of sensory abilities which link to some form
of physical central processing centre like the human brain. The human senses are sight,
taste, hearing, touch and smell. The sensory impressions are relayed to the brain which
formulates an assessment which is based on an accumulation of previous impressions.
The smell and taste of a peach is an accumulation of previous interactions with the fruit.
However in the human species the gut is now considered to be a second brain where
independent decisions in the functioning of the body are made. Although lacking the more
sophisticated cognitive aspects of the brain, it nevertheless is capable of producing
independent actions which have significant effects on the organism.
http://www.psyking.net/id36.htm.
A final component of a definition could be the ability to transfer information. Though
inanimate the table nevertheless reflects light and thus transfers information about itself to
an observer. And even in a dark room it will transfer information of itself to an unwary shin in
a painful fashion. Its existence as a structure in this reality gives it this function.
To go back to the example of the table. It began as an entity of a billions years old selfreplicating system which has resulted in a tree in a forest, a grouping of similar forms which
grow and replicate within the boundaries of beneficial growth elements. At the point of cutting
the tree down, killing it, it was capable of expanding its genus on a continuos basis; even to
time scales of thousands of years. Now that it has been cut down and separated from its
neural network it lapses into an entropic state where it is no longer capable of occupying
greater space but rather occupies less space as it crumbles and rots. It has lost its ability to
be conscious. The term deadwood is very apt here.
This is similar to the human body once it dies. It too can be fashioned into functional objects,
as has been done in some art forms and it would follow the same pattern of entropy as the
table.
So where do we draw the line between alive and dead? The table and the human skull
paperweight which sits on it both impart information to our senses and both occupy space,
thereby being valid entities in our reality.
Neither though, is self-replicating. Could one then define alive as being able to self-replicate
and capable of occupying (to an optimal scale) an increasing volume of space?
Now once again paradoxically, it would seem that living entities cannot function in an
environment devoid of non-living entities. Or can they? Perhaps in a Garden of Eden
environment with perfect climate which would not require clothes and with a constant supply
of fruit, fresh water and grains it would be possible, but not probable. (In the traditional
Biblical interpretation the garden of Eden excluded the concept of Death, which could be
perhaps considered to be the antithesis of consciousness. Consequently, Paradise could
perhaps be a state of constant hyperconsciousness.) Perhaps not probable because of the

complexity of our central processing unit (CPU), the brain and the sophisticated combination
and range of our information assimilating faculties, our senses.
Is it possible that as a result of random primary molecular bonding an initial primitive sensory
organ - say touch - developed and the CPU had no option but to develop as a consequence
of the amount of new information being accessed? This principle operates in babies, human
and non-human.
So it would seem that in principle one could consider any self-replicating system as
possessing an element of consciousness, relative to the complexity and volatility of its CPU
or neural system. One could perhaps draw a comparison to shares in the stock market where
some trade in large numbers and with constant price changes due to the complexity of the
parent company while others are largely stagnant and illiquid, languishing at the same price
levels price week after week. The human being versus the tree.
And if this is the case, the next question would be - what are the functions of consciousness?
Could it be that, assuming a molecule developed an element of spatial awareness, it also
developed a superiority over other molecules in the assimilation of limited resources? In this
way it would fulfill the requirement of being self-replicating and occupying an increasing
volume of space. Again this is a common principle in nature; coral reefs, fungi, forests, with
no end purpose other than becoming the dominant species through no reason other than the
fact that there was nothing to prevent it becoming so. Of course a natural balance of
interdependency would emerge, otherwise the extinction of the species would be a
consequence.
As an aside, this is unfortunately being seen as a current social problem of humanity today.
So in what way does consciousness as defined by self-replicating and occupying space differ
between multicellular organisms like humans and unicellular one like spores or fungi?
There would be an increase of QUANTA OF POTENTIAL, PROBABILITY and VOLATILITY in
the complexity of structure.
Everything possesses a quantum* of potential.
* Physics a discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it
represents.
an analogous discrete amount of any other physical quantity, such as momentum or electric charge.
Physiology the unit quantity of acetylcholine released at a neuromuscular junction by a single
synaptic vesicle, contributing a discrete small voltage to the measured end-plate potential.
The manner in which it is expressed is defined by its inherent probability*
*The extent to which something is probable; the likelihood of something happening or being the case :
the rain will make the probability of their arrival even greater.
a probable event : for a time, revolution was a strong probability.
the most probable thing : the probability is that it will be phased in over a number of years.
Mathematics the extent to which an event is likely to occur, measured by the ratio of the favorable
cases to the whole number of cases possible : the area under the curve represents probability | a
probability of 0.5.
This event will be modulated by its structural volatility*

1 (of a substance) easily evaporated at normal temperatures.

2 liable to change rapidly and unpredictably, esp. for the worse : the political situation was becoming
more volatile.
(of a person) liable to display rapid changes of emotion.
(of a computer's memory) retaining data only as long as there is a power supply connected.
noun (usu. volatiles)
a volatile substance.
New Oxford American Dictionary
So lets take the comparison with the table and the human.
Each possesses a certain quantum of energy, the accumulated sum of their molecular
structure, with the human possessing a greater complexity of pathways of energy.
Each possesses the capacity of probability; the table may become firewood, or smaller
utilitarian structures like shelves, but again will for the most part remain as it always was from
construction while the human is more open to event interaction - possessing many more
options as a result of its more complex structure and physical capacity and mobility.
Each has a component of volatility - change in physical structure. Each changes
infinitesimally each nanosecond as microcellular deaths and growths occur in the human and
decomposition in the table. But again the table will for the most part remain as it always was
from time of construction.
Based on these criteria, both table and human possess elements of consciousness, with one
distinct difference; the human is capable of independent and considered movement of its
physical entity in a time/space continuum while the table is not.
Now one has to consider the relevant abilities of physical structures and delegate an element
of consciousness to each, with the human species having a rating of 100. This does not
imply any superiority to the human, but simply its capacity of quantum of potential, probability
and volatility.
Taking the human as 100, we could perhaps rate a fungal spore at 25, a coral reef at 50, a
plant at 75, the animal kingdom at 95 and human at 100.
Anything less than 25 would exist as elements of the conscious world but in a regressive
state (entropy) rather than a progressive state (negentropy). For simplicity we would consider
these elements to be termed alive. This would include crystal structures. In other words
these entities possess a quantum of potential to influence reality in a probabilistic way
relative to the volatility of their structure.
A further distinction could now be drawn. In the alive group, some entities possess a critical
level of volatility - an ability to alter their structure and interact with the world in ways more
complex than others. In this group would be organic and inorganic substances and elements
and a division would be made based on the above definition. So inorganic mineral crystalline
structures would be distinct from organic structures, these being the animal kingdom (which
would include lower invertebrates, spiders and other arachnids, insects, fishes, frogs,
reptiles, birds, mammals) and the human race.

What determines a critical level of volatility? Crucially there would be the ability for electrical
energy to flow in as unimpeded way through subsystems of the entity as possible. In the
same way that information flows much faster along fiber optic cables than copper cables, so
the option for mutation of a basic system exists. Though information flows extremely fast in a
crystal like silicon, the mainstay of the computer industry, it exists basically as a single
system, whereas organic entities possess a greater range of interacting and interdependent
subsystems.
To summarise:
As a result of an undefined event which we term the big bang a dimension has emerged
which we, as perceptive entities, call reality.
The world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of
them : he refuses to face reality | Laura was losing touch with reality.
a thing that is actually experienced or seen, esp. when this is grim or problematic : the harsh realities
of life in a farming community | the law ignores the reality of the situation.
a thing that exists in fact, having previously only existed in one's mind : the paperless office may yet
become a reality.
the quality of being lifelike or resembling an original : the reality of Marryat's detail.
2 the state or quality of having existence or substance : youth, when death has no reality.
Philosophy existence that is absolute, self-sufficient, or objective, and not subject to human
decisions or conventions.
New Oxford American Dictionary
Within this dimension there are individual entities which have developed as a result of an
initial interaction. As a consequence of advantageous specific molecular bonding, organisms
developed and have expanded exponentially both in complexity of information pathways and
structurally, occupying greater spatial volume. The commonly understood term evolution
could be used to describe this process.
A crucial element of this expansion was the sophistication of sensory development in the
organic stream as opposed to the purely structural development in the inorganic stream. The
greater access to sensory information, the greater the opportunity to develop complexity and
dominance over other entities.
I would see this as self-explanatory in the same way that a child develops and uses
information about fruit through long term sensory exposure. Some are sweet, some sour,
some hard, some soft, some smooth, some prickly. This information is stored, is accessed
when needed, and forms the basis of the childs interaction with other fruits.
However these faculties could equally be functions and programmed systems of a
mechanical entity - a robot.
Is it difficult to propose that from this background of environmental exploration that the
organism developed a parallel sense which we call consciousness; a sense which
encompasses intangibles like emotions, which are essentially the intense combination of
physical and mental response? This would include the entire animal kingdom.
Perhaps as a result of biblical permission - man given domination over the animal kingdom there developed a perception that animals do not possess emotion or consciousness; they

there developed a perception that animals do not possess emotion or consciousness; they

live in a reactive state to their environment, but research has shown that this is a false belief.
I will not go into the vast data showing that even the most simple animal species is capable of
emotions akin to human; love, fear, greed etc.
So how to explain the birth of these emotions, which are the building blocks of
consciousness? Why should the robotic computer be equally capable of processing
information and have similar capacities of movement yet not possess consciousness?
The first considerations would be that of entropy, negentropy and the ability to grow - to
sequentially occupy greater spatial volume.
The robot exists from construction/birth as an unchanging structure, occupying the same
spatial volume. It is entropic, decreasing in structural order. Animals are not. They are
negentropic, increasing in structural order. The robot has a capacity for processing
information only within the capacity of its central processing unit. Animals are able to vastly
increase the ability of information processing and storage with the same unit, the brain.
Both require a source of energy to function. The robots is very basic, electricity. The animals
is extremely complex, requiring as well as electricity, a mixture of minerals, carbohydrates,
proteins, gases ....
We know that with increased information comes greater volatility. The stock market example.
Could the combination of a complex energy supply mechanism (quantum of potential), linked
to a sophisticated range of sensory abilities, (volatility) have developed into an optimal
(probable) structure which became self-aware?
In the same way that a molecule can, and has no option but to change its structure as a
survival mechanism, a result of interaction with its environment, so too would it have
developed more sophisticated sensory abilities through the process of survival of the fittest.
This process is an incipient state of learned behavior, self-awareness, a feedback loop of
information processing, a precursor to consciousness. In this way a computer stores
cookies which enable faster access to a returned website.
If it had not happened, that molecular structure would simply not exist, in the same way that if
the orbit of the earth were fractionally different the human race would not exist. We are here
because conditions were just right for us to be here. The Goldilocks Effect.
A conscious system must have a central processing unit and have an organic structure.
So I would like to propose a new definition of consciousness.
Consciousness is defined as the process of interaction in all organic systems which
encompasses the flow of information between sensory faculties and the central processing
unit. This would be aggregated as a complexity index of information flow, defined as a sum of
the various physical subsystems - nervous, endocrine, circulatory, lymphatic etc. The index
would comprise a weighting where the more complex subsystem is assigned a higher value.
For example if the total value in humans is 100, the neural system would have a value of 40
while the circulatory system a value of 10.
The entity would also have the capability to sequentially occupy a greater spatial volume
through its own volition and to perform functions within its physical ability on command of the
CPU.

CPU.

So consciousness as such is not an individual entity, but rather the assemblage of all the
information processing systems in the organism.
In this way the brain dead human still possesses an element of consciousness relative to its
optimum value but it would be an incomplete value. Whereas a strong and healthy tree would
possess a complete value but a lower scale of conscious complexity.
An unimpeded free flow in all the subsystems in the entity at any level of volatility of
information would result in the optimal functioning of the CPU (central processing unit) while
a disjointed and irregular flow of information would result in a dysfunctional CPU. So the
disfunction of the endocrine system could lead to a malfunction of the thyroid gland leading to
a lower scale of consciousness.
This is clearly seen in the brain scans of meditating monks as opposed to schizophrenics.
This definition would account for a scale of consciousness from the most basic organic
molecule to the most complex system.
So using these definitions, one could perhaps define the Earth as having elements of
consciousness.
It is also important to remember that this process is one which would unfold over billions of
years.
In my opinion this definition in no way negates the vast range of human experience and
emotion. It merely describes these (yes, somewhat pedantically) more precisely as to their
quantum and operation of expression.
The romantically inclined will no doubt cut this proposal down in shreds with the criticism that
there is no space for the intangibles of imagination, love, beauty and mysticism.
My reply is that the vastness of the neural ability of the brain allows for all this, to whatever
level of functionality you would like to take it. The permutations of the brain for forming new
subsets of systems are virtually endless and we are often told by science that we use only a
fraction of it.
Finally, does this definition exclude the ideas of parapsychological abilities:-telepathy,
precognition, psychokinesis, reincarnation, etc.
Again, I dont think it necessarily does. I think that many of these abilities simply require a
refining or a rewiring of our CPU. The ability of precognition of death for example has in some
cases been found to be an inherited trait; a differently wired CPU. Regarding other esoteric
abilities, I think that we do for the most part possess the raw material in our physical structure
to achieve far more than what is considered as normal, but to do so also requires enormous
discipline and training. A case in point is the investigation into the atomic structure of
elements by Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater.
The other under-researched areas of our physical structure are fields of electromagnetic
energy. I think there are aspects of the mind/body system like faith healing which could be
rationalized with a greater understanding of the placebo effect which is essentially faith
healing.

rationalized with a greater understanding of the placebo effect which is essentially faith
healing.

Regarding out of body and near death experiences I await with great interest the results of Dr
Sam Parnias research into the experiences of patients undergoing surgery which will
hopefully throw some light on the ability of the consciousness to leave the body.
Regarding other esoteric theories like reincarnation, which would presumably require the
containment of the consciousness as an entity independent of a physical structure, the
understanding of the human system as an electromagnetic field and quantum mechanics in
which particles have a charge value yet no mass leads me to think that this is not as farfetched as usually thought.

10
Every experience on the physical, astral or mental plane is just a dream before the soul.
Bowl of Saki, June 16, by Hazrat Inayat Khan
Commentary by Pir-o-Murshid Inayat Khan:
The soul in itself alone is not other than consciousness, which is all pervading. But when the same
consciousness is caught in a limitation through being surrounded by elements, in that state of captivity, it is
called soul. ... Every experience on the physical or astral plane is just a dream before the soul. It is ignorance
when it takes this experience to be real. It does so because it cannot see itself; as the eye sees all things, but
not itself. Therefore, the soul identifies itself with all things that it sees, and changes its own identity with the
change of its constantly changing vision.
The soul has no birth, no death, no beginning, and no end. Sin cannot touch it, nor can virtue exalt it. Wisdom
cannot open it up, nor can ignorance darken it. It has been always and always it will be. This is the very being of
man, and all else is its cover, like a globe on the light. The soul's unfoldment comes from its own power, which
ends in its breaking through the ties of the lower planes. It is free by nature, and looks for freedom during its
captivity. All the holy beings of the world have become so by freeing the soul, its freedom being the only object
there is in life.
from http://wahiduddin.net/mv2/V/V_45.htm