Menu

Avi Sion's New Blog

Three principles for biologists to ponder.
Allow me, as a result of the above reflections, to formulate a number of basic principles for the advancement of the science of biology, to help it evolve from its current narrow, materialist perspective to a more advanced, enlightened one. Modern biologists are scared to even confront these issues for fear of being regarded by their colleagues as unscientific; but a true scientist takes all available information into account and courageously follows reason.
1. There is no possibility of consciousness without selfhood.
Wherever consciousness is evident, selfhood must be present. That is, any living organism which displays evidence of any degree or extent of consciousness, in its structure (notably, sensory organs, a nervous system, a motor system) or its behavior patterns (notably, movement apparently of its own accord, without wind, water currents, or other mechanical forces impinging on it), must be assumed to have a self – meaning a ‘soul’, a ‘spiritual’ presence, a ‘personality’. Consciousness is inconceivable without a cognizing Subject as well as a cognized Object. Consciousness necessarily implies someone being conscious, i.e. an entity doing the cognizing, and a content of consciousness, i.e. something being cognized. These are not merely verbal, grammatical, necessities, but logical, conceptual, necessities.
2. Consciousness also necessarily implies volition and valuation.
There is no possibility of a living organism with evident powers and exercise of consciousness, to whatever degree and extent, that does not also have powers and exercise of volition (that is, free will), to some degree and extent, and powers and exercise of valuation (that is, value-judgement). Consciousness by itself, witnessing the world passively, would have no biological utility to a living organism, and would thus be rapidly eliminated by evolution if it perchance arose.
The biological utility of consciousness is that it makes possible the ability to actively respond, through some sort of self-generated action, to whatever is cognized in the environment of the self. If a living organism is found to move of its own accord, i.e. evidently not through the agency of an external mechanical force, it can and must be assumed to have volition to that degree and extent, especially if its physiology includes organs of motricity (nerves, muscles, arms, legs, etc.).
Moreover, consciousness and volition imply valuation: without some sort of value-judgment (opting for some things or courses of action as favorable to self in some way, and avoiding others as unfavorable to self), which need not be verbal and rational, but may be instinctive or emotional, the environmental information gathered by consciousness would be useless, and any action taken by the organism would be capricious, devoid of useful direction, and eventually surely self-destructive.
3. Therefore, selfhood has three intertwined powers: cognition, volition, and valuation.
Every living organism that displays any of these three powers necessarily has all three, and a self that exercises them. A ‘self’ means a ‘soul’, and it can mean nothing else. It is possible that there are primitive living organisms that do not have self and its three functions, but function on a purely mechanical action-and-reaction plane. But it is certain that, at the other end of the spectrum, there are living organisms – namely, at least ourselves and the higher animals – which do have the three said powers and the self that they logically imply. It is up to biological science to determine empirically precisely where the line, if any, must be drawn. What is sure, however, is that we, human beings, evidently have self, and the powers of consciousness, volition, and valuation; and evidently at least some other animal species do. Without admission of this truism, biologists cannot truly claim to be scientists because they function in an intellectual straitjacket divorced from some significant facts.
To be perfectly clear: anyone who thinks otherwise, who thinks there is no such thing as a self/soul, no consciousness, no volition, no valuation, is engaged in self-contradiction, since he or she is evidently a person thinking these claims, and probably also saying or writing them for other people to think about them. Self-contradiction is not ‘scientific’. As Descartes rightly reflected: My thinking is plentiful proof of my existence. Ignoring manifest information is not ‘scientific’. It is impossible to perceive or conceive anything, to formulate any thought about anything, without consciousness, the power and act of cognition necessary to all thinking; without volition, in this context the power and act of moving one’s attention through the necessary thinking processes; or without valuation, in this context the ability to estimate what is true or false, a thought to be retained or one to be dismissed.
So long as biologists do not accept, and take into full consideration in their research and theories, the facts of self, and its faculties of cognition, volition, and valuation, they are engaged, at best, in poor science. When they get the courage and integrity to finally do so in earnest, their science will surely be greatly enriched.
 
 

Go Back

Post a Comment
Created using the new Bravenet Siteblocks builder.