Darwinist: Learning to Live with Panpsychism? – Discovery Institute

Photo: Cat's Eye Nebula, by NASA, ESA, HEIC, and Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA).

Jerry Coyne,a traditional Darwinian evolutionary biologist and author ofWhy Evolution Is True,is having a hard time understanding why anyone would even consider taking panpsychism seriously. His bafflement over the growing acceptance of the idea that every living thing (or everything) is conscious to some extent may shed light on some new features of the changing science landscape.

His jumping off point is a recent three-way debate/discussion, sponsored byMindChat,between panpsychist philosopherPhilip Goff,naturalist theoretical physicistSean Carroll,and physicalist philosopherKeith Frankish,who views the mind as anillusion created bythe brain or, as Coyne puts it, a trick of the biological mind.

Coyne, as a metaphysical naturalist (nature is all there is), is quite sure that panpsychism is bunk and that Carrollwonthe debate:

I watched only until an hour and 45 minutes in, so I cant tell you what happens in the rest of the discussion. But if you watch up to that point, and listen to Seans eloquent and patient explanations, and see the sweating panpsychist professor try to prop up his crumbling ideas, you will not be any more enamored with panpsychism than you were before. In other words, youll see that its a theory without substance.

But speaking of theories without substance, a commenter, Maximillian,writes to notethat Carroll is a proponent of themultiverse,itself acontestedidea, deemed unfalsifiable. The commenter also points out a fact that Coyne appears reluctant to take into consideration:

Maximillian:Integrated information theory (which strictly speaking is not panpsychist in Goffs sense) is currently a leading contender for a theory of consciousness. According to IIT, consciousness is what it feels like when information is processed. If that turns out to be the case, then it is within the realm of possibility that the arrangement of physical matter in patterns unlike the biological brain might lend conscious experience to other entities that current scientific theories do not comprehend. In fact, if IIT is correct, physical fields could in principle be conscious. But that is a big if.

Yes, thats right.Integrated Information Theory(IIT)isa leading contender for a theory of consciousness. Would it likely be a leading theory if cranks, kooks, and charlatans were driving the bus?

Read the rest at Mind Matters News, published by Discovery Institutes Bradley Center for Natural and Artificial Intelligence.

Link:

Darwinist: Learning to Live with Panpsychism? - Discovery Institute