Guest Author - Tara Sullivan

Panpsychism is the philosophical school of thought proposing that consciousness pervades all of material existence. It stands opposed to emergent theories of consciousness that explain consciousness as an emergent state occurring in particular instances due to the happenstance arrangement of matter (i.e. human consciousness emerges from the serendipitous arrangement of our biology). Panpsychism, on the other hand gives all matter a mind, its ideological roots growing out of the animism that was the spiritual dogma of our ancestors.

Animism was the primal belief that souls, spirits or supernatural beings existed within both the inanimate and the animate world. Ancient cultures believed that everything, including stars, rocks, trees and humans was imbued with consciousness. Today, mostly due to mechanistic, classical Newtonian scientific views of the physical world most people find these ideas unfounded and superstitious.

For me, it is difficult to accept that consciousness could merely be the byproduct of a particular arrangement of molecules. It seems counterintuitive. Panpsychism intuitively makes sense and maintains consciousness as fundamental. Emergent theories seem to be the easy way out-they simply rely on empirical evidence, or in this case, the lack thereof to make their case for them. Emergent theories are unimaginative and only provide one with a relatively superficial understanding of consciousness. Emergence of consciousness seems to be the scientific conclusion based upon empirical evidence, but as we all know the world isn’t always as it seems.

The problem with emergent theories is the problem of relying on empirical evidence to define universal truths. We, as scientists and seekers of knowledge of the physical world are like misinformed easedroppers hearing only bits and pieces of a converstation in the next room. With our ears to the door, we listen attentively but only catch words and phrases such as “Bob” and “funeral” and “January 17th.” We piece these bits of information together to form hypothesis’ about the nature of that conversation. We propose that perhaps Bob died and his funeral was on January 17th or maybe Bob went to a funeral on January 17th. With advances in technology perhaps we are able to hear more and more of this converstation which is the analogy for the scientific study of nature, but it seems that our empirical evidence will continue to be limited by our very inadequate sensory awareness.

That being said, the evolution of scientific thought, in particular quantum mechanics can still be looked at to provide support for an appodeictic argument for pansychism.

Panpsychism is rescued from the cold, reductionist clutches of classical science by quantum mechanics. On a quantum level we begin to see evidence of the interplay between matter and consciousness. On this microscopic level according to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics, an observer can influence the position a particle might inhabit when electrons are shot at a screen, and then subsequently their position is measured. It seems that if an observer can influence the movement of the particle, then the mind of the observer, excluding any unaccounted behaviors or “hidden variables” is in communication with the particle. If a human mind can be in communication with an electron it is logical to say that that electron must have properties of sentience, or else no communication, much less influence could be possible.

Stay tuned for more meditations on this subject and others.