Question: Does a single atom have consciousness?

[cdowis]

[deleted]

Edited March 6, 2016 by cdowis

[cdowis]

2 hours ago, canard78 said:

It "becomed"?

cdowis... are you trolling us?

"minecraft"

Is there anyone else here interested in this discussion?

Edited March 6, 2016 by cdowis

[canard78]

45 minutes ago, cdowis said:

"minecraft"

Is there anyone else here interested in this discussion?

My boys were intrigued at the idea of a diamond planet, so thanks for that nugget of information. 

I'm still wondering about the beginning of the conversation. What sort of consciousness does a planet have. If it obeys God's commands can it also disobey them? Does the planet have agency? Are there times of natural disaster when the planet has "chosen" to create some natural disaster?

[cdowis]

May I suggest that you turn your attention from minecraft to reading the scriptures.

[Nofear]

2 hours ago, cdowis said:

Is there anyone else here interested in this discussion?

Well, it was a foolish question to begin with. Even if an atom were able to make a choice, what information would the choice be based on?

Does an atom remember? If it does not, it can't make a "choice" based on anything that happened before. Each new "choice" would for all practical purposes be indistinguishable from random.

[longview]

1 hour ago, Nofear said:

Well, it was a foolish question to begin with. Even if an atom were able to make a choice, what information would the choice be based on?

Does an atom remember? If it does not, it can't make a "choice" based on anything that happened before. Each new "choice" would for all practical purposes be indistinguishable from random.

Remember how Jesus told the Pharisees that if the people did not shout Hosannas, the stones around them would cry out.  It is not the stones that have a physical brain or a physical mouth.  It is the spiritual component that has some degree of intelligence.  Even atoms have spiritual components.  First there was spiritual creation (organizing the intelligences together).  THEN the physical creation (spiritual placement into physical forms).

Makes me wonder what the "rolling" or "unrolling" of the heavens and the earth entails?  Is what we see with our physical eyes a mere facade?

[TrespassersW]

23 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Not really. At the quantum level they appear and disappear at random.

The way I read the scriptures, which could certainly be wrong, is that consciousness (or intelligence, as it is called) is organized. Which implies to me that individual atoms do not have intelligence, but may contain the essential building blocks from which intelligence is made.

What quantum theory does is do away with pure determinism, which may not actually open the door for the existence of free will, but it prevents that door from being completely closed.

Quantum theory (some interpretations of it anyway) also implies that consciousness, in the form of an observer, causes changes in the way quantum particles behave. 

So, overall, I don't think it's correct to say that electrons make decisions, but I don't think it unfair to say that quantum theory is more friendly to the idea of free will than classical theory was.

[thesometimesaint]

29 minutes ago, TrespassersW said:

The way I read the scriptures, which could certainly be wrong, is that consciousness (or intelligence, as it is called) is organized. Which implies to me that individual atoms do not have intelligence, but may contain the essential building blocks from which intelligence is made.

What quantum theory does is do away with pure determinism, which may not actually open the door for the existence of free will, but it prevents that door from being completely closed.

Quantum theory (some interpretations of it anyway) also implies that consciousness, in the form of an observer, causes changes in the way quantum particles behave. 

So, overall, I don't think it's correct to say that electrons make decisions, but I don't think it unfair to say that quantum theory is more friendly to the idea of free will than classical theory was.

I don't accept the Scriptures as a reliable guide to science.

At what point does building block become intelligent? I don't know. Individual cells appear to be alive, but lack a number of factors that make free will possible, at least how we understand it. Atoms are incredibly smaller and less complex than cells. So I can't say that atom in any real sense have free will. Heck I'm not convinced people are that  intelligent.

I've never been a fan of pure determinism. An atom of Helium doesn't interact with much of anything. So it is very hard to posit any free will at that level. At the human level can we will ourselves to not have Oxygen atoms bond with the Iron atoms in our bodies? Not unless we take positive actions to prevent it.

Just depends on how far down that "rabbit hole" we want to go.

Agreed.

[Maidservant]

D & C 93

29 Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

33 The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;

35 The elements are the tabernacle of God; yea, man is the tabernacle of God, even temples;

 

D&C 88

12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space—

13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.

36 All kingdoms have a law given;

37 And there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in the which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is no space, either a greater or a lesser kingdom.

38 And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.

42 And again, verily I say unto you, he hath given a law unto all things, by which they move in their times and their seasons;

43 And their courses are fixed, even the courses of the heavens and the earth, which comprehend the earth and all the planets.

44 And they give light to each other in their times and in their seasons, in their minutes, in their hours, in their days, in their weeks, in their months, in their years—all these are one year with God, but not with man.

45 The earth rolls upon her wings, and the sun giveth his light by day, and the moon giveth her light by night, and the stars also give their light, as they roll upon their wings in their glory, in the midst of the power of God.

46 Unto what shall I liken these kingdoms, that ye may understand?

47 Behold, all these are kingdoms, and any man who hath seen any or the least of these hath seen God moving in his majesty and power.

 

2 Ne 2:14 And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and he hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be acted upon.

 

D&C131

7 There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes;

8 We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter.

= = = = =

These are scripture I like that speak to the subject you have introduced, although I'm sure pondering is in order.

Consciousness and self-awareness are actually distinct phenomena, although related.  Consciousness means to be aware of one's environment.  Self-awareness is another level--aware that you are aware.

Does an atom have consciousness or self-awareness?

I believe the body (avatar) to be a technology, and thus atoms are technology as well.  This does not exclude consciousness nor self-awareness, of course.

The atom operates as it is meant to operate without any self-aware direction on our part.  It is intelligent as to the law and realm it inhabits.  It responds to its environment.  It creates (according to law).

Additionally, cells operate without any self-aware direction on our part either.

If consciousness is awareness of environment, then any thing capable of responding to the environment might be termed conscious (including atoms).

But is there a "ME" or an "I AM" in the atom? I don't know, but my guess is no.

Is there an "I AM" in the cell?  Also my guess is no.

The self-awareness arises from complex structures and interactions in specific portions of the brain (insular cortex).  Additionally, even in our human development we may spend some time without self-awareness (as infants) but we would be conscious.

[thesometimesaint]

7 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

I believe the body (avatar) to be a technology, and thus atoms are technology as well.  This does not exclude consciousness nor self-awareness, of course.
 

Without atoms it is kinda hard to have technology.

[Maidservant]

12 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Without atoms it is kinda hard to have technology.

Indeed, ha ha.  Without atoms it's kinda hard to have anything :).

[thesometimesaint]

38 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

Indeed, ha ha.  Without atoms it's kinda hard to have anything :).

We'll always have Paris.

SEE https://www.google.com/search?q=we%27ll+always+have+paris+&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

[canard78]

6 hours ago, cdowis said:

May I suggest that you turn your attention from minecraft to reading the scriptures.

I'd suggest it, but my science loving sons are too busy looking up this intriguing diamond planet. 

Meantime, what about those consciousness questions I asked?

[CV75]

12 hours ago, canard78 said:

My boys were intrigued at the idea of a diamond planet, so thanks for that nugget of information. 

I'm still wondering about the beginning of the conversation. What sort of consciousness does a planet have. If it obeys God's commands can it also disobey them? Does the planet have agency? Are there times of natural disaster when the planet has "chosen" to create some natural disaster?

There are things that act and things that are acted upon. We need to be careful how we treat them so that we do not treat things that are to be acted upon as if they act (e.g. idolatry), or things that act as if they do not (e.g. murder), hence the law of obedience. Neither should we act upon things contrary to the way God would (hence the laws of sacrifice and consecration).

The things in Helaman 12:8-19 are fully acted upon for the glory of God, but people are not fully acted upon except by their choice (verses 7 and 20-23). He acts upon His creations by the power of His light (D&C 88:7-13). We become less than the dust of the earth when we do not act as designed in response to His light (as the dust does) because we place ourselves outside His perfect design in which the dust in contrast operates perfectly.

With the light of Christ permeating all things in such a way that He knows everything and is present everywhere (at least as far as we are concerned), His “consciousness” is in and through all things (D&C 88:13) whether they possess consciousness on their own or only borrow or house it from an entity that does possess it. In this way He uses “the voice of thunderings, and the voice of lightnings, and the voice of tempests, and the voice of the waves of the sea heaving themselves beyond their bounds” to make a point (D&C 88:90). In any case, we need to treat the earth and each other well because she reacts badly to sin, whether by her own or borrowed consciousness.

It would seem that the earth’s consciousness in Moses 7 is the borrowed variety, if not from Christ, from someone else who serves as the “mother of men.”

So, to answer those questions, I think a planet at the very least has a consciousness that is borrowed from Christ (e.g. Facsimile No. 2, Figure 5). It obeys God’s commands only in the sense Helaman 12 describes (acted upon according to the command of God), with borrowed agency. The interesting thing about this is, having agency makes it possible to use agency as Christ does (Helaman 10:4-10, 16; 11:4-6). The natural disasters that come in consequence of the wickedness of a planet’s inhabitants would be a reflection of the consciousness acting through it (the Lord’s will as in D&C 88) or the consciousness of those acting upon it in a bad way (Moses 7).

[cdowis]

There are things that act and things that are acted upon. 

Those things which are to be acted on (dust), do they follow the law of free agency when they are commanded and obey?  (do they have intelligence)  Not sure exactly of your point in the context of this thread.

[CV75]

21 minutes ago, cdowis said:

There are things that act and things that are acted upon. 

Those things which are to be acted on (dust), do they follow the law of free agency when they are commanded and obey?  (do they have intelligence)  Not sure exactly of your point in the context of this thread.

We have agency. We are acted upon by being enticed (2 Nephi 9:39; Mosiah 3:19) and make choices (2 Nephi 2:16). We are acted upon further when our agency is lost by our bad choices, surrendered to the Lord by our good choices, robbed by others' bad choices, or endowed through grace after all we can do in the way of good. We in turn act upon other things (or people), some of which have agency and some of which do not.

I don't know whether or how much agency dust has, but it seems to be among those things that are designed strictly to be acted upon, does not possess agency. For example, our spirits determine the glory of the resurrected body (the spirit controls the element), not the other way around. Man is spirit (D&C 93:33), and was designed to strictly act in innocence (93:38 as opposed to 93:39), and remain the spiritual and elemental temples of God (93:33-37).

So I think the phenomenon of dust moving about as God commands is only His light acting upon it, and this is "good" (as in the Creation was "good") because God's purposes for His design of it are fulfilled. Its significance is greater than the disobedient mortal for the same reason: it will always do better things in better hands.

[canard78]

6 hours ago, CV75 said:

There are things that act and things that are acted upon. We need to be careful how we treat them so that we do not treat things that are to be acted upon as if they act (e.g. idolatry), or things that act as if they do not (e.g. murder), hence the law of obedience. Neither should we act upon things contrary to the way God would (hence the laws of sacrifice and consecration).

The things in Helaman 12:8-19 are fully acted upon for the glory of God, but people are not fully acted upon except by their choice (verses 7 and 20-23). He acts upon His creations by the power of His light (D&C 88:7-13). We become less than the dust of the earth when we do not act as designed in response to His light (as the dust does) because we place ourselves outside His perfect design in which the dust in contrast operates perfectly.

With the light of Christ permeating all things in such a way that He knows everything and is present everywhere (at least as far as we are concerned), His “consciousness” is in and through all things (D&C 88:13) whether they possess consciousness on their own or only borrow or house it from an entity that does possess it. In this way He uses “the voice of thunderings, and the voice of lightnings, and the voice of tempests, and the voice of the waves of the sea heaving themselves beyond their bounds” to make a point (D&C 88:90). In any case, we need to treat the earth and each other well because she reacts badly to sin, whether by her own or borrowed consciousness.

It would seem that the earth’s consciousness in Moses 7 is the borrowed variety, if not from Christ, from someone else who serves as the “mother of men.”

So, to answer those questions, I think a planet at the very least has a consciousness that is borrowed from Christ (e.g. Facsimile No. 2, Figure 5). It obeys God’s commands only in the sense Helaman 12 describes (acted upon according to the command of God), with borrowed agency. The interesting thing about this is, having agency makes it possible to use agency as Christ does (Helaman 10:4-10, 16; 11:4-6). The natural disasters that come in consequence of the wickedness of a planet’s inhabitants would be a reflection of the consciousness acting through it (the Lord’s will as in D&C 88) or the consciousness of those acting upon it in a bad way (Moses 7).

Why does matter need borrowed consciousness to be acted upon?

If I take a handful of sand and mold it into a sandcastle or sprinkle it through my fingers on the ground, has the sand borrowed my consciousness? 

The answer would be no. The movement of the sand into shape or from one place to another is simple physics. A greater force has "acted upon" it. It doesn't need consciousness to move it just needs a force. 

If there is a God controlling the elements then wouldn't the same be true? The earth wouldn't need borrowed consciousness to do all the things it does. 

Mad for wicked people causing natural disasters, you'll have to explain that one to me. How does wickedness physically cause an earthquake?

[deli_llama]

I wouldn't say if individual, single atoms have consciousness, I have my own thoughts and understandings with no evidence or proofs, but there are molecules that do have cognitive power. To the best of my understanding they are all macromolecules like chlorophylls,  β-carotene, retinal, rhodopsin, G-proteins, small RNA's, and so on. 

I also wonder if there isn't some value in not worrying too much if they, individual atoms, have intellegence or consciousness, instead paying more attention to what they are made of, intellegence?

[deli_llama]

40 minutes ago, canard78 said:

Why does matter need borrowed consciousness to be acted upon?

If I take a handful of sand and mold it into a sandcastle or sprinkle it through my fingers on the ground, has the sand borrowed my consciousness? 

The answer would be no. The movement of the sand into shape or from one place to another is simple physics. A greater force has "acted upon" it. It doesn't need consciousness to move it just needs a force. 

If there is a God controlling the elements then wouldn't the same be true? The earth wouldn't need borrowed consciousness to do all the things it does. 

Mad for wicked people causing natural disasters, you'll have to explain that one to me. How does wickedness physically cause an earthquake?

I don't know that matter needs to borrow consciousness to be acted up, however consciousness itself can and doesn't act upon matter, even to the degree that we can even affect the atomic decay rates in RNGs. Intention has a key role in this. Intention, consciousness, and the ways they can interact with and affect matter on the microscopic and macroscopic world have been studied in the scientific community. If our conscious experience and intentions can affect the material world around us, why couldn't negative intention, or wickedness, also leave a mark?

[cdowis]

55 minutes ago, canard78 said:

Why does matter need borrowed consciousness to be acted upon?

If I take a handful of sand and mold it into a sandcastle or sprinkle it through my fingers on the ground, has the sand borrowed my consciousness? 

Wrong analogy.  I am physically moving the sand.  

Now, what if I take the case mentioned in Helaman, that God  commands a mountain be moved to another location? It is being acted upon, but it is obeying God's command which indicates intelligence.  You are assuming "being acting upon" does not require intelligence, but clearly that is not what is being taught here in Helaman.  The dust obeys, the mountain obeys.   That is the basis of the creation process -- speak and matter obeys.

[canard78]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

Wrong analogy.  I am physically moving the sand.  

Now, what if I take the case mentioned in Helaman, that God  commands a mountain be moved to another location? It is being acted upon, but it is obeying God's command which indicates intelligence.  You are assuming "being acting upon" does not require intelligence, but clearly that is not what is being taught here in Helaman.  The dust obeys, the mountain obeys.   That is the basis of the creation process -- speak and matter obeys.

Bother! The internet just swallowed my first reply.

Dust and mountains need force applied to move. If, for the sake of the conversation, we accept a God that created the universe, there is some physical power or force being exerted that moves the dust and mountains (and much more). "Speak and matter obeys" comes from the viewpoint that grew out of people not understanding the principles of physics. Creation myths have been born, throughout time, out of a lack of understanding of how matter moves and is acted on. That's not to blame them as they were writing and attempting to explain earth origins and natural events long before they had the tools to do so.

It reminds me of a quote from Elder Stephen L. Richards

Quote

 

"What if Hebrew prophets, conversant with only a small fraction of the surface of the earth, thinking and writing in terms of their own limited geography and tribal relations did interpret Him in terms of a tribal king and so limit His personality and the laws of the universe under His control to the dominion with which they were familiar? Can any interpreter even though he be inspired present his interpretation and conception in terms other than those with which he has had experience and acquaintance? 

Even under the assumption that Divinity may manifest to the prophet higher and more exalted truths than he has ever before known and unfold to his spiritual eyes visions of the past, forecasts of the future and circumstances of the utmost novelty, how will the inspired man interpret? Manifestly, I think, in the language he knows and in the terms of expression with which his knowledge and experience have made him familiar. So is it not therefore ungenerous, unfair and unreasonable to impugn the validity and the whole worth of the Bible merely because of the limited knowledge of astronomy and geography that its writers possessed."

 

Improvement Era 36:451-453, 484-485, June 1933

[cdowis]

4 hours ago, canard78 said:

 "Speak and matter obeys" comes from the viewpoint that grew out of people not understanding the principles of physics. Creation myths have been born, throughout time, out of a lack of understanding of how matter moves and is acted on. That's not to blame them as they were writing and attempting to explain earth origins and natural events long before they had the tools to do so.

OK, so you are of the view that Joseph Smith (el al) is the author of the Book of Mormon, and the words in Helaman demonstrates that he was just an ignorant farmer with a fantastic imagination.  I'm glad to hear that you are so forgiving of his abject ignorance.

[CV75]

6 hours ago, canard78 said:

Why does matter need borrowed consciousness to be acted upon?

I don’t know – I didn’t say that. I said that the light of Christ permeating all things could be construed as His consciousness permeating all things since it is associated with how He is in all and governs all things (D&C 88:40, 41). In this sense, He lends His consciousness to the element so that it does what He wants. When God acts upon matter, His consciousness is part of that operation, as well as when He is not acting upon it. A planet would have this kind of "borrowing."

6 hours ago, canard78 said:

If I take a handful of sand and mold it into a sandcastle or sprinkle it through my fingers on the ground, has the sand borrowed my consciousness?

You could say that the sand you play with is subject to your consciousness, and reflects it, carries it, etc. in the same sense that your speech and written word do. At some point your actions and their consequences may be divorced from your consciousness (so don’t drink and drive!).

6 hours ago, canard78 said:

If there is a God controlling the elements then wouldn't the same be true? The earth wouldn't need borrowed consciousness to do all the things it does. 

God controls the elements and has delegated this power and keys to some of His servants. This power is used to teach a lesson, punish, protect and bless—all intentions of His consciousness. Q: Who is being taught? A: Our spirits, not our elements.

6 hours ago, canard78 said:

Mad for wicked people causing natural disasters, you'll have to explain that one to me. How does wickedness physically cause an earthquake?

Who said wickedness (or righteousness for that matter) without an attendant actor and action (or inaction) causes a natural disaster, or that all natural disasters are caused by wicked actors, or that opposition in the fallen world isn’t part of the physical system used to test our spirits and give us pause to consider how God can intervene to help us and teach us to do the same?

As a perfect being, God’s actions and their consequences are perfectly integrated with His consciousness.

[thesometimesaint]

21 minutes ago, cdowis said:

OK, so you are of the view that Joseph Smith (el al) is the author of the Book of Mormon, and the words in Helaman demonstrates that he was an ignorant farmer with a fantastic imagination, that God chose to talk to.   I'm glad to hear that you are so forgiving of his abject ignorance.

Much better.

[canard78]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

OK, so you are of the view that Joseph Smith (el al) is the author of the Book of Mormon, and the words in Helaman demonstrates that he was just an ignorant farmer with a fantastic imagination.  I'm glad to hear that you are so forgiving of his abject ignorance.

Hi, cdowis.

I'm happy to have a conversation about this question on Mormon "terms" of engagement. I'm personally open to the possibility that Joseph (et al) was not the author. I've never called him an ignorant farmer.

If it really is the translation of the ancient doings and writings of the Lehites... then the same problem applies. Helaman, if he existed, wouldn't have had any greater access to scientific knowledge than Isaiah or Paul. He would have been just as influenced in his views of how the universe was created by his environment and "received wisdom" as other prophets have been. 

We're forgiving of Joseph's (possible) belief that the moon was inhabited because that was product of his time. We're equally generous to Joseph Fielding Smith about his mistaken conviction that we'd never get a man in space or on the moon. If Helaman existed, he lived at a time when there was no scientific explanation for volcanoes and earthquakes. How else would someone of that era explain such huge movements other than to say "God must have told it to move and move it did." There's a rational explanation for earthquakes that we now understand. Helaman wouldn't have and so, quite reasonably, framed it in his environmental perspectives.

Even in my believing days I wouldn't have gone to the scriptures for science... just like I don't go to science for my scriptures. As Elder Talmage said:

Quote

The scientist in his self-denying earnest labors is a true child of God; as he is strengthened spiritually will his work be the better. The scientific spirit is divine.

James E. Talmage
The Improvement Era 1900, Volume 3