MK: In my book, I give an entirely new definition of consciousness which describes the consciousness of animals and human alike. My theory is testable, reproducible, falsifiable, and even measurable. This definition in particular focuses on the consciousness of animals and humans. However, there is also another type of consciousness, which is sometimes called cosmic consciousness, which goes to the heart of the quantum theory (my specialty). It is so sensitive that even Nobel Laureates today are not in uniform agreement. Basically, the quantum theory (which I teach to our grad students, and which is the most successful physical theory of all time) says that you have make an observation to determine the state of any object (e.g., atoms, electrons, laser beams). Before you observe something, it exists in a never-never-land world, being neither here nor there. (For example, this means that a cat in a closed box is neither dead nor alive in this nether state, before it is observed.) But once you make an observation, you know precisely the state of the cat (e.g., it is alive.) So, in some sense, an observation was necessary for the cat to exist. But observations imply consciousness. Only conscious beings can make an observation. Hence, it seems that consciousness is more fundamental that reality, and that a cosmic consciousness is necessary to observe the universe so that the universe can exist. The greatest minds of science have struggled with this question, without a final resolution. But in my book, I give you a critique of the various bizarre solutions that have been proposed. As J.B.S. Haldane once said, the universe is not only queerer than we suppose, it is queerer than we can suppose.So this is what the Self throws my way. This is the State of the Art of Consciousness?
1) Humans are animals
2) Only human animals have a relative perspective attached to sensoric input. Therefore, only I "have" Con sciousness i.e. I "am" Conscious, and in this we are forever con/fusing ownership with being.
3) To MK and other ignorant intellectual minds, there will always be "also Another type of...". If you by chance realize any of my points, you will know that this is what intelligence does; when observing one, it divides, when observing two it unites. MK is of course no exception, neither is You.
4) It is sensitive because it is at the heart of intelligence imploding on its Self. The wise guys can sense this, but they do not know how to make sense of this vague input. Sensitive implicates importance that is not intellectual but more visceral.
5) The most successful theory gets some product placement. That is important, so the reader knows that what MK says is based on Success. Remember that Truth and Pragmatism are not same.
6) The rest is a tour de force in dualism and mistaken causality. It is obvious, not to you but to me, that MK believes there has to be ears in the forest for change in air pressure to actually occur when the tree falls. If you know anything about human perception and physics, you know that "sound" requires the faculty of "hearing", that outside the faculty of hearing, there is just change in air pressure/Waves and thus, that sound is relative to hearing. The physical reality of change not related to the faculty of hearing (air pressure) is independent of hearing, while the mind response (sound) is dependent.
Sometimes I sense urgency in explaining reality. It is like we're almost there. When I read stuff like the above, I relax. If MK represents the avantgarde of science, we have a long way to go.
Still, all it takes is a change of perspective, and all he says will be crystal clear. MK is virtually right and would be absolutely right if he looked to the left.
Forward searching for truth can only progress with re-searching backwards.
For now, MK is totally stuck.
0112 is Emc2 backwards, know That and You 2 will C Me.
It's all a yoke ;)