Whose Reality?
I can be conscious only of what’s in my consciousness. Obviously. And what’s in my consciousness? Just sensations, perceptions, thoughts, and feelings.[1] Sensations, like being conscious of experiencing hot or cold, arise when my nervous system responds to some internal or external environmental condition. Perceptions, like being conscious of a particular sound, arise from electrochemical impulses that are generated by my sense organs. Some thoughts seem to spontaneously appear in my consciousness. My experience is that I willfully create and direct some thoughts. Feelings appear to arise from the moment-to-moment experience of the first three aspects of consciousness.
The first statement in the previous paragraph is true of every human being.[2] What is not clear is where consciousness comes from. Almost everyone agrees that sensations arise from bodily experiences. If you are conscious and feeling cool it’s because the temperature of the air, or water, or whatever surrounds your skin is below some personal threshold. A similar statement about perceptions appears to be true. There is more diversity about the ultimate origin of feelings and thoughts. My position is that both of these are also emanations of physical activity in a person’s brain.
So, although I can only be conscious of the contents of my consciousness, I take it as axiomatic that there is a single “out-there” that is responsible for all of my sensations and perceptions. I term this out-there “objective reality”. All that I am, or ever was, conscious of, I term “subjective reality”. Further, I take it as axiomatic that there is a distinct, idiosyncratic subjective reality for every conscious being, but only a single objective reality. These axioms underlie all of the propositions and arguments that I’ll be presenting or discussing on this site.
Everyone’s awareness of what’s-out-there is constructed from sensory data, and we know that each of us can sense only a small portion of what’s-out-there.[3] We now know that the dynamic complexity of our brains exceeds anything else in the known universe. Furthermore, the content and processes of every ones subjective reality are influenced by their brain’s moment-to-moment operation. It follows, then, that every subjective reality is unique.
If the content of one person’s subjective reality does not overlap with another person’s, there is no room for dialogue except to try to mutually delineate differences. It is only when there is some semblance of common ground that it is possible to dialogue to improve one’s understanding of what’s-out-there.
Human imagination knows no bounds. Anything is open to philosophical inquiry, but as I stated in “About”, my primary concern is with the near-term survival of human civilization. Chauvinistic of me, I’ll admit, but this is my primary concern. Prior to the last seven decades the survival of civilization was not an issue. Now it is. This issue will be decided by human action, quite possibly in the next seven decades. Constructive action vis-sa-vis what’s-out-there must be directed by careful thought and dialogue. My intention is that this site make a contribution, however feeble, toward this endeavor. My hope is that others will offer comments and contributions in support of this goal.
Notes:
[1] Of course there are other attributes of consciousness. I offer this four-part partition of the content of consciousness as one way of framing a rational discussion of what is ultimately a completely subjective experience.
[2] My first statement appears to be just a tautology. But doesn’t it apply to every human being? I assume it does. I take this as a fundamental truth.
[3] Actually, the situation is worse. Our individual perceptions are also to some degree unique.


I received this comment in email from Elise Cox:
I've been reading "The Uninhabitable Earth" by David Wallace Wells. What is even more shocking/disturbing than the book is the fact that it was written in 2017, and all we have been able to do as a species is accelerate the path toward a mass extinction event. We in the age of the last generations. Mike and I made the decision not to reproduce, and I hope others join us. Voluntary abstinence from reproduction might be able to do what international accords cannot. It sounds extreme, I know, but we have pushed the planet beyond its limit to support life within the boundaries that the global population requires. So many smart people I speak to are engaging in magical thinking — that AI or a Chinese nuclear program will somehow make up for our individual abdication of responsibility. In the meantime, they continue to talk about the children or grandchildren they are looking forward to rearing. Good actors/bad actors -- it all becomes irrelevant as the global average of CO2 continues to climb. Our lives are too comfortable to change. Right now the question, I think, is how quickly the effects of climate change can destabilize society enough to promote severe and drastic change in emissions versus how much damage we will do to the atmosphere before that happens.
I received this comment in email:
why do you think its axiomatic that the origin of consciousness is physical, when science has traced the origin of consciousness back to microtubules in the brain that interact with quantum fluxuations on the brain (let's remember the quantum fluxuations have been almost completely proven to be nondeterministic, eg not the result of the physical universe only). Isn't that in essence a circular reasoning fallacy where you're assuming consciousness has a physical origin in order to prove that it has one?
Garrett Lang