Pride & Fear of Missing Out
The Vegetarian

Panpsychism

I'm a panexperientialist physicalist, not a panpsychist but similar. Here is a recent philosophical defense of panpsychism in which the author concludes that while it might sound crazy, it is probably also the best explanation.

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Robert Asbell

My default reactionary response to things like pan-psychism is always a validation of Romans 1 where rejection of God results in pan-theism (loosely speaking), We are all part of the universe kind of thing.

But sometimes when I read a folks with such a High Christology that mentions Jesus holding the universe together and even the quarks, and leptons, and electrons, and so forth are subject to his Supremecy and obey his command ... that sort of thing. Well, when I read those things I can't help but think of panpsychism and wonder if those parts of creation are concious to obey the command.

I'm weird I know

Scott

None of that sounds weird to me.

Robert Asbell

Ok ... now I have to ask. What is pan experiantialist physicalist?

Scott

So, a physicalist believes there's only one type of actuality in the cosmos--physical stuff (as opposed to a dualist or idealist). But a panexperientialist believes that all that physical stuff has some sort of first person experience which in its more complex forms is conscious. Panpsychism is a term that once meant everything has a mind, which I don't believe. Minds emerge from complex physical organisms.

This is what I wrote my dissertation about.

Robert Asbell

Ok ... So if we put things on a continuem we might have something like:

materialism (not very robust ontology)
physicalism (slightly more robust )
the physicalist panexperientialist (even more robust ... taking in relations? processes? I know you are a process kinda guy).

so when the primal stuff becomes complex conscience and intentionality emerge from this?
This sounds like supervenience!

something like that? no?

Scott

Not exactly supervenience, which was the view I criticized in the dissertation.

But the rest sounds good.

Yes, this is process philosophy of mind, which is also deeply beholden to James's views on relations.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)