When thinking about consciousness, mobodick, you should first and foremost think about yourself, because that's the only evidence of consciousness that you have. There is no objective proof that other "beings" or "objects" or anything that you come across has consciousness. They might all be very good at pretending to be conscious, but you will never know for sure if they really are conscious.
Yes, but i apply occams razor here.
If i have to choose between a mathematically coherent universe with autonomous entities called humans and seing everything as an elaborate set-up then the coherent universe option wins without question.
The universe would just be very very silly if i was the only one with a conciousness and the rest pretended they did.
On a similar note, the chance that we ALL are a simulation of sorts is much much greater
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulation_hypothesis
This is the only path i'm willing to think along when it comes to considernig conciousness as not generated by our brain.
I mostly agree with what you said here, except a few things.
Firstly, mathematically coherent Universe and "an elaborate set-up" are not two different things, mathematics is a result of a conscious process and it is very elaborate.
Second thing that bothered me when I was thinking about mathematically coherent Universe with autonomous human beings is how I would end up there without me existing somewhere already in the first place. You see, I don't have a problem imagining such a Universe, but the chances of me emerging there would be around 0. It will simply be filled with other human beings (whether conscious or not, I wouldn't know) and there would be no reason, no recipe for that Universe to create me. Me showing up in such a Universe would be an improbable singularity happening against all odds and laws of physics.
So if I already exist (and I know I do) then that Universe would be a secondary construct in relation to me. That Universe would be contained inside me and not the other way around. That what the idea of primacy of consciousness is. You know about your own existence with higher certainty than you know about Universe's existence, wouldn't you agree? It simply can't be the other way around.
I think this video might be of interest to you:
"The Holographic Universe (Part One)"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMBt_yfGKpU
EDIT: edited some paragraphs above for clarity.
So ask yourself, how did you come into this picture of completely unintentional, neutral and indifferent Universe?
Think of the point in time 10 years before your birth. Are "you" already in the plans of the Universe? Does it know that you are going to be born? Does it know what parents you are going to have? Does it care?
Why are you assigning human stuff to the concept of the universe?
Why would you assume the universe is capable of planning?
What do you mean by the universe 'knowing' i'm going to be born?
In what way have you ever seen the universe 'knowing' anything, more less what parents i'm going to have?
Let me ask you this.
Does a rock know it's shape?
Or is it simply the shape?
The universe as we know it is at least a four dimentional object, propably more.
What we normally see around us is called spacetime.
It means that all of time is already embedded in this spacetime object.
It doesn't know anything, it simply is.
It is us that are limited by thermodynamical laws and under influence of entropic pressure.
We cannot see spacetime as a whole, we have to travel along the time axis and let that dimention unfold.
We just travel from one side of the rock to the other at the speed of time.
I like your train of thought here and, again, I mostly agree with it.
The geometric shape of the Universe as an elaborate space-time crystal (in lower four dimensions) doesn't necessarily know or able to plan anything because as you correctly mentioned, it is static and it simply is. What is changing though and what is, in a sense, "alive" is the consciousness studying this crystal by filling it with itself, looking at it from as many different perspectives as it can. And the tricky part is that this mathematical crystal and the consciousness studying it are not two different things, the former is the product of the latter. It would be very illogical to suggest the opposite, where the consciousness would arise from a static mathematical construct that simply is.
I don't think hell is a singular place either. You can create hell on Earth or some other place if you wish, or you can create Heaven within yourself regardless of where you are physically. Everything is just an experience.
As I understand it you are always a singular consciousness, what can change though is your level of awareness about other consciousnesses when you loose your physical receiver which you are currently locked into. It doesn't mean you immediately become aware of everything in the Universe. Knowledge on all levels needs to be earned. As above, so below.
I just wrote a pretty long explanation on how conciousness happens in humans (and mostly in mammals etc) but the forum burped on me and i lost it.
I don't feel like rewriting it now.
I can only say that what you propose is more like fantasy. There is no factual evidence for it.
There is, on the other hand lots and lots of factual evidence that conciousncess if funcionally created by the brain.
Parts of your conciousness can break down (illness, accidents) and it so happens that those broken parts seem to be doing exactly the function that has been broken.
Just look that stuff up yourself.
I mean, why would altzheimer have an effect on conciousness? It only breaks down the brain so according to you the conciousness should not be affected.
But with this dissease things like awareness and personality and memory break down. In fact, everything you could ever call a concious person slowly breaks down. So all these properties must be created by the brain.
There is no singular spiritual entity like a soul outside of the brain.
About manipulating the brain and observing the effects on consciousness, yes, it might look confusing at first and lead to erroneous conclusions about its origin, but there is a good analogy that would explain the situation. Imagine you're sitting locked in a dark room looking at the world around you through a glass window. If the glass is clean and transparent you can see very well, but if somebody puts some mud on your glass or even worse tries to break it so that it gets covered with tiny cracks all over the surface your vision of reality gets heavily distorted and you might even go crazy from that experience.
I cannot prove that to you, but from what I gathered being locked to the body for a life time is the latest iteration of the rules of the 3D game we are all playing. It hasn't always been like that though, but it was decided in that way, so that we can learn certain lessons that can only be learned from challenges associated with that experience. It was decided collectively and we are all here because we all agreed and wanted to play this game.
There is a lot of evidence of consciousness existing outside the body, but it is often ridiculed and not taken seriously.
There are examples of people born blind and able to see the Universe for the first time when they are in a state of coma due to some unrelated accident and then wake up from it an tell about their experiences. Or people who undergo surgical operations on the brain that require complete shutdown of the brain (no neuron activity whatsoever during the operation) and are able to tell afterwards that they saw their body laying on the table, saw the instruments that doctors used in the operation and even heard what they were talking about.
You can check out this site about NDE (near-death-experience) if you're interested in this topic:
http://www.near-death.com/