Universal Consciousness as the Ground of Logic

Philip Goff
{"title":"Universal Consciousness as the Ground of Logic","authors":"Philip Goff","doi":"10.30965/9783957437303_007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Shortly after the Second World War, Aldous Huxley published a book defending what he called ›the perennial philosophy,‹ a metaphysical theory he argued had arisen 2,500 years earlier and had subsequently cropped up in many and varied cultures across the globe.1 According to Huxley, the view did not emerge from abstract philosophical speculation but because its truth came to be directly known to various individuals whilst in altered states of consciousness, in many cases the result of intense meditative training. What was the content of this view? In standard analytic philosophy of mind, we distinguish between the subject of a given experience and the phenomenal qualities which characterise what it’s like to have that experience. In an experience of pain, for example, there is the thing which feels the pain (e.g. me) and there is the qualitative character of how the pain feels; the former is the subject of the experience, the latter is its phenomenal quality. In the altered states of consciousness discussed by Huxley, however, this division apparently collapses resulting in a state of pure or ›universal‹ consciousness: consciousness unencumbered by phenomenal qualities. More dramatically, people who achieve these states of consciousness claim that it becomes apparent to them, from the perspective of the altered state of consciousness, that universal consciousness is the backdrop to all individual conscious experiences, and hence that in a significant sense universal consciousness is the ultimate nature of each and every conscious mind. This realization allegedly undermines ordinary understanding of the distinctions between different people and leads to a conviction that in some deep sense »we are all one«. This is not a view that has been explored a great deal in the context of analytic philosophy, which tends to proceed by building coldblooded rational arguments for a given position, rather than by intuiting its truth via altered states of consciousness. However, Miri Albahari has recently presented just such a coldblooded defence of the perennial philosophy, arguing that it offers a better solution to the problem of consciousness than rival theories.2 I am fascinated, but ultimately unconvinced, by her argument. I would like here","PeriodicalId":112077,"journal":{"name":"Panentheism and Panpsychism","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Panentheism and Panpsychism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30965/9783957437303_007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Shortly after the Second World War, Aldous Huxley published a book defending what he called ›the perennial philosophy,‹ a metaphysical theory he argued had arisen 2,500 years earlier and had subsequently cropped up in many and varied cultures across the globe.1 According to Huxley, the view did not emerge from abstract philosophical speculation but because its truth came to be directly known to various individuals whilst in altered states of consciousness, in many cases the result of intense meditative training. What was the content of this view? In standard analytic philosophy of mind, we distinguish between the subject of a given experience and the phenomenal qualities which characterise what it’s like to have that experience. In an experience of pain, for example, there is the thing which feels the pain (e.g. me) and there is the qualitative character of how the pain feels; the former is the subject of the experience, the latter is its phenomenal quality. In the altered states of consciousness discussed by Huxley, however, this division apparently collapses resulting in a state of pure or ›universal‹ consciousness: consciousness unencumbered by phenomenal qualities. More dramatically, people who achieve these states of consciousness claim that it becomes apparent to them, from the perspective of the altered state of consciousness, that universal consciousness is the backdrop to all individual conscious experiences, and hence that in a significant sense universal consciousness is the ultimate nature of each and every conscious mind. This realization allegedly undermines ordinary understanding of the distinctions between different people and leads to a conviction that in some deep sense »we are all one«. This is not a view that has been explored a great deal in the context of analytic philosophy, which tends to proceed by building coldblooded rational arguments for a given position, rather than by intuiting its truth via altered states of consciousness. However, Miri Albahari has recently presented just such a coldblooded defence of the perennial philosophy, arguing that it offers a better solution to the problem of consciousness than rival theories.2 I am fascinated, but ultimately unconvinced, by her argument. I would like here
作为逻辑基础的普遍意识
第二次世界大战后不久,奥尔德斯·赫胥黎出版了一本书,为他所谓的“永恒哲学”辩护。他认为,这种形而上学的理论早在2500年前就出现了,随后在全球许多不同的文化中突然出现根据赫胥黎的观点,这种观点并不是来自抽象的哲学思辨,而是因为它的真理在不同的意识状态下被不同的个体直接认识,在许多情况下,这是高强度冥想训练的结果。这个观点的内容是什么?在标准的精神分析哲学中,我们区分特定经验的主体和表征这种经验的现象性特质。例如,在疼痛体验中,有一个感受疼痛的东西(比如我)有一个疼痛感觉的定性特征;前者是体验的主体,后者是其现象性。然而,在赫胥黎所讨论的意识的改变状态中,这种划分显然崩溃了,导致了一种纯粹的或“普遍的”意识状态:不受现象性品质阻碍的意识。更引人注目的是,达到这些意识状态的人声称,从意识状态改变的角度来看,他们很明显地看到,普遍意识是所有个体意识体验的背景,因此,在某种意义上,普遍意识是每个意识心灵的终极本质。据称,这种认识破坏了对不同人之间区别的普通理解,并导致一种信念,即在某种深层意义上“我们都是一个人”。在分析哲学的背景下,这并不是一个被大量探索的观点,分析哲学倾向于为一个给定的立场建立冷血的理性论证,而不是通过改变意识状态来直觉它的真理。然而,Miri Albahari最近为这一经久不衰的哲学提出了这样一种冷酷的辩护,认为它为意识问题提供了比其他理论更好的解决方案我对她的观点很着迷,但最终还是不相信。我想在这里
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信