Metaphysics of Consciousness
What is metaphysics and why is it important
Science is the study of how nature behaves; what it does. Scientists create models of nature’s behavior by asking questions and making predictions on what it will do in a given situation. If the model (hypothesis) is correct as substantiated by repeatable experimentation and, therefore, continually makes accurate predictions, scientists call it a theory and hand off this model to the engineers. The engineers, in turn, can then build practical things by following the model and to utilize it to build techologies to the benefit of humanity – like a nuclear reactor to generate electricity. Sometimes that same knowledge from the scientist's models can be used to humanity’s detriment – like building a nuclear bomb. Either way using models to build things useful to humanity is what technology is all about.
Models do not have to explain what nature is really doing. It only has to be able to make accurate predictions about nature’s behavior. In other words, to be directly correlated with what nature does so that it has the appropriate predictive value. When Sir Issac Newton developed his theory of gravity, later called Newtonian Theory of Gravity, he was initially ridiculed and scoffed at in certain circles because his theory defied conventional thinking of the time. How could some invisible force interact between two objects without physically touching each of them? And yet, Newton’s model worked well enough to put men on the moon a few centuries later (albeit with slight mid-course corrections along the way).
In the early 20th century, Albert Einstein came along and proposed a radically different model, the General Theory of Relativity. Invisible forces were out and masses that could bend the very fabric of space and time were in. This model of gravity was much more accurate and one that could accurately predict slight variations in the orbit of the planet mercury as it traveled around our sun. Today scientists are proposing new theories of gravity like Loop Quantum Gravity and several others to account for nature’s behavior at the quantum level not covered by any of the earlier theories.
The point to all of this is that all these theories are just models of nature’s behavior so they have predictive value, but they are not necessarily accurate descriptions of the actual thing itself – what nature actually is (being). In other words, “the map is not the territory”. Over the last 200 years or so science has been very successful at predicting nature’s behavior. Hence, we now have these incredible technologies that make our lives so much easier and, hopefully, better than ever before. But, many of us have forgotten the fundamental fact that they are just models, the map is not the territory. It describes the territory to some extent – it correlates with whatever the territory is, but it is not the territory itself. It’s just a description.
Metaphysics, on the other hand is the philosophical study of what nature actually is. It is about being, and not about the doings of nature. We see our external reality through our sensory perceptual mechanisms of sight, sounds, taste, smell, touch, etc.). We know that all these perceptions (of our external reality) are filtered by our consciousness. So, we do not have any direct way to perceive what nature actually is, only what it appears to be doing.
Metaphysics can inform science. If a metaphysical description of nature supports what nature actually does (behavior) and can account for many behaviors that a competing metaphysical description cannot, then that metaphysical description of nature can be really useful. For example, a good metaphysics can be useful at suggesting new fields of scientific exploration. If, on the other hand, it cannot account for some of nature’s behavior as actually studied, it has to be discarded in favor of some other metaphysical description.
A metaphysical assumption can be validated (or invalidated) by science but by itself, it cannot be falsified. Nature did not give us the perceptual mechanisms or the cognitive abilities to perceive nature as it really is. This can be proven mathematically. For if we could see nature for what it actually is, we would have to match all external states one-for-one with internal states in our consciousness. A feat that would require the consumption and dissipation of so much energy that it would probably cause our entire body to evaporate in an instant.
Another good analogy are the icons of the computer screen that I am typing this essay on. If I have to be concerned with the actually patterns of the binary numbers and their transmission that are actually being manipulated by my computer hardware, it would take me 100 years just to enter, process and store the first sentence of this essay. Instead, I just type at a much higher level (of abstraction) and don’t have to worry about what actually takes place in the computer hardware or in the MS Word program or the MS Windows operating system that is running on that hardware.
With science (the study of nature's behavior), hypotheses can be substantiated or falsified by experiment. That’s how science advances. One of the problems, though, is that scientists are also human beings. They make all kinds of metaphysical assumptions of what reality is like, usually subconsciously that have a major impact on their work as scientists. All the while without realizing it. They forget that their maps are only models describing what nature is actually doing, and not what nature actually is. Many of these assumptions are the results of cultural influences that they are not even consciously aware of.
So, if a scientist’s metaphysical assumption is that consciousness is a biproduct of physical brain processes (an epiphenomena), then they may never be inclined to even look, let alone study, consciousness in organisms that do not have brains or even in brains less complex than ours. If, on the other hand, they have a deep-seated metaphysical assumption that some type of consciousness (call it phenomenal consciousness – just the state of pure raw experience) pervades the entire universe and everything in it, than that may lead them to a totally new path of investigation. This could include things, like extrasensory perception, mystical state of consciousness or even survival of some aspect of consciousness after bodily death.
This same argument goes for how the mind influences our body (the placebo or nocebo effects) and visa versa. This could open up a whole new fields of scientific investigations. And, in some circles, in the last few decades it has. Belief in your doctor's ability to heal you can be as important as the efficacy of some of the medicine they prescribe, and with a lot fewer unwanted side effects.
Today there are several competing metaphysical descriptions of the reality we find ourselves living in. They are…
(stay tuned - more to come)