B
Consciousness. That is fundamental.
The principle of infinite indivisibility, as applied to both matter and energy, can (in principle) reduce to a singular, indivisible object or unit of existence. Present-day science has revealed a number of elementary and fundamental particles that are thought to be indivisible, but it is not yet known if this is true and if there might exist yet another layer of reality to be unpeeled. Technically, fundamental and elementary are separate classifications of different subatomic particles, however I will use the terms interchangeably.
The fundamentality of consciousness is a resultant corollary from the adoption of the concept of the necessary existent in Avicenna's Proof of the Truthful argument. In his proof (by contradiction), Avicenna argues that two necessary existents cannot have distinguishing parts which would separate and identify them. For if they did, then these distinguishing parts would be shared, and thus fundamental and indistinguisable as necessary existents. Hence, the contradiction. Therefore, there exists only one necessary existent.
Applying the logic of this reasoning and its conclusion to our reality yields that there must necessarily be one shared substance or essense which underlies the rest of material existence. This is a simple proof of panpsychism, yet it does not preclude God as a necessary existent, since one of God's properties include being the first cause. This results in a paradox whereby the first cause by the nessary existent results in the causation of a fundamental aspect of creation that underlies the rest of creation (points and endpoints in the causal chain), giving us more than one necessary existent.
In order to avoid this potential paradox we must choose one of two possibilities: 1) pansychism is true and consciousess is the unary, underlying aspect, or 2) God exists.
The second possibility has implications that may be unsettling. One such implication is that we are, in fact, not conscious. Furthermore, this would also imply that consciouness does not actually exist and is truly an illusion.
The principle of infinite indivisibility, as applied to both matter and energy, can (in principle) reduce to a singular, indivisible object or unit of existence. Present-day science has revealed a number of elementary and fundamental particles that are thought to be indivisible, but it is not yet known if this is true and if there might exist yet another layer of reality to be unpeeled. Technically, fundamental and elementary are separate classifications of different subatomic particles, however I will use the terms interchangeably.
The fundamentality of consciousness is a resultant corollary from the adoption of the concept of the necessary existent in Avicenna's Proof of the Truthful argument. In his proof (by contradiction), Avicenna argues that two necessary existents cannot have distinguishing parts which would separate and identify them. For if they did, then these distinguishing parts would be shared, and thus fundamental and indistinguisable as necessary existents. Hence, the contradiction. Therefore, there exists only one necessary existent.
Applying the logic of this reasoning and its conclusion to our reality yields that there must necessarily be one shared substance or essense which underlies the rest of material existence. This is a simple proof of panpsychism, yet it does not preclude God as a necessary existent, since one of God's properties include being the first cause. This results in a paradox whereby the first cause by the nessary existent results in the causation of a fundamental aspect of creation that underlies the rest of creation (points and endpoints in the causal chain), giving us more than one necessary existent.
In order to avoid this potential paradox we must choose one of two possibilities: 1) pansychism is true and consciousess is the unary, underlying aspect, or 2) God exists.
The second possibility has implications that may be unsettling. One such implication is that we are, in fact, not conscious. Furthermore, this would also imply that consciouness does not actually exist and is truly an illusion.
In the interest of saving time and energy, I have taken judicious liberty with the reasoning and arguments (read: skipping) that result in the choices to resolve the paradox. I will leave this as an exercise for the reader.
This may be an argument against deism, if one wants to argue that consciousness is a real phenomenon that occurs in us.
Fuck.
Last edited:
