In October, there will be a special issue of the Journal of Consciousness Studies consisting of 19 essays responding to my work (by scientists, philosophers, and theologians) and one essay in which I respond to these essays. My response also discusses what a post-Galilean science of consciousness might look like. Ten of these essays (including the introduction, which gives an overview) are already online, and are linked to in the contents below:
- Introduction, by Philip Goff and Alex Moran
- Carlo Rovelli – ‘Relations and Panpsychism,’ Centre de Physique Théorique de Luminy, Aix-Marseille University.
- Sean Carroll – ‘Consciousness and the Laws of Physics,’ California Institute of Technology and Sante Fe Institute
- Lee Smolin & Clelia Verde – ‘Physics, Time and Qualia,’ Perimeter Institute of Theoretical Physics
- Anil Seth – ‘The Real Problem(s) with Panpsychism,’ Sackler Centre for Consciousness Science, University of Sussex, Programme for Brain, Mind and Consciousness, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
- Christof Koch – ‘Reflections of a Natural Scientist on Panpsychism,’ Allen Institute for Brain Science in Seattle
- Jonathan Delafield-Butt – ‘Autism and Panpsychism: Putting process in mind,’ University of Strathclyde
- Robert Prentner – ‘Dr Goff, Tear Down This Wall! The interface theory of perception and the science of consciousness,’ Center for the Future Mind, Florida Atlantic University
- Chris Fields – ‘What is a Theory of Consciousness For?,’ independent researcher
- Luke Roelofs – ‘Is Panpsychism at Odds with Science?’ New York University
- Annaka Harris – ‘A Solution to the Combination Problem and the Future of Panpsychism,’ New York Times bestselling author.
- Keith Frankish – ‘Galileo’s Real Problem,’ Sheffield University.
- Michelle Liu – ‘Qualities and the Galilean view,’ University of Hertfordshire
- Alex Moran – ‘Grounding the Qualitative: A New Challenge for Panpsychism,’ Oxford University
- Alyssa Ney – ‘Panpsychism and the Limits of Physical Science,’ UC Davis
- Damian Aleksiev – ‘Missing Entities: Has Panpsychism Lost the Physical World?’ Central European University
- Ralph Weir – ‘Can Post-Galilean Science of Consciousness Avoid Substance Dualism?’ University of Lincoln
- Galen Strawson – ‘Oh, You Materialist!’ University of Texas at Austin
- Joanna Leidenhag – ‘Why a Panpsychist Should Adopt Theism: God, Galileo and Goff,’ University of St Andrews
- Sarah Lane Ritchie – ‘Panpsychism and Spiritual Flourishing: Constructive Engagement with the New Science of Psychedelics,’ University of Edinburgh
Replies from Philip Goff
- ‘Putting Consciousness First’ University of Durham
I think in the 2020s there will be a scientific revolution that will make all other scientific revolutions seem puny and insignificant! Subjective physics will change everything!
Imagine finding out that you are really a high mass dark matter homuncular particle in your brain, conceived 13.8 billion years ago in the Big Bang with a long genetic code and with code to become a universe far in the future!
Imagine in the far future you grow to be a universe and marry another universe and rotate around each other before finally merging and experiencing a big bang in which a googol particles are conceived which both of you will raise for trillions of years!
In the more immediate future, imagine being able to purchase an appropriate artificial body for almost any planet, moon, or space station! Simply move your dark matter homuncular particle with the surrounding focusing crystal to a new body — it would be like putting your sim card in a new mobile phone!
Most death and pain will be gone when the artificial body industry goes into mass production! Who knows, maybe Mr. and Mrs. Universe might incarnate to help their Earth children through this momentous transformation to ensure no catastrophes occur — Heaven on Earth!
The universe is too complicated to happen by chance which leaves design or evolution. Evolution by natural selection requires reproduction — that is the reason for the theory that particles are the offspring of the universe and since we are conscious — so are the parent(s) — the Universe!
The low mass particles would have its external behavior rigidly controlled so complicated bodies and machines could eventually be built but could still have internal free will — freedom of choice in a VR or dream world. Low mass particles can have greatly reduced time perception because they are not responsible for their external behavior. The Universe aided by conscious intelligent virtual particles could ensure consistent external behavior (laws of physics) of low mass particles.
The high mass particle offspring such as dark matter would evolve to be smart conscious homunculi that could be attached to an enormous variety of bodies which it communicates with by electromagnetic code (awake dark matter would have an electric charge) and have the experience that it was their natural body.
Much higher energy particles could have enough maturity to be born again as a whole new universe and be a member of the very highly advanced universe society, marry and merge with another universe and raise a googol particles that take trillions of years to become new universes!
The idea is in a sense that universes spend their childhood as particles in the womb of their parent(s) universe and may be attached to a succession of many different bodies as part of their education and the Universe only really gives birth to them as an adult (in education not size)!
Pingback: Monograph on panpsychism in the ‘Journal of Consciousness Studies’ (around ‘Galileo’s error’ by Philip Goff) – Picando voy (English version)
Following 20 years of private research I have come to the conclusion that consciousness is located at the entangled interface between the universe/antiverse pair, in the moment we call ‘now’. The qualia we experience are non-physical manifestations of complex physical structures, that are generated locally by the expanding universe at it’s interface with universal consciousness.
On Sun, Aug 1, 2021, 10:13 PM Conscience and Consciousness wrote:
> Philip Goff posted: ” In October, there will be a special issue of the > Journal of Consciousness Studies consisting of 19 essays responding to my > work (by scientists, philosophers, and theologians) and one essay in which > I respond to these essays. My response also discusses wh” >
Just got it in the mail. Major mini-tome. It is an important work, but in some ways misses the mark.
I think there are some things missing, such as:
1. Connection of Panpsychism to indigenous cultures which have maintained this worldview for tens of thousands of years
2. Connection to the science of relationality–Semiotics (and, with respect to living organisms, Biosemiotics) What semiotics contributes is a science of meaning and significance based on a Semiotic Realism that is effectively ‘calls out’ the ‘threat of Nominalism’ (as CS Peirce pointed out over 100 years ago)
3. Connection to the CosmoPanpsychism of Freya Mathews that has been around for a while and comes out of the search for an ‘ecological civilization’ that would address existential risk and the Climate Crisis that is upon us in full force.
4. The ideas particularly of John Deely and Walker Percy regarding the ‘a-causal’ action of signification, the concept of a sign and sign action that can be traced back to the pre-Socratics and which was posed in complete form in the 17th century by the Scholastics as Scholastic or Semiotic Realism but which went down when the ‘political solution’ (not a philosophical solution) posed by Descartes was embraced and so the rise of Cartesian Nominalism that has played out in the last 3.5 centuries and has now put us on what Toby Ord calls ‘The Precipice’
Pingback: Matthew Segall – Psybertron Asks
Pingback: 19 – Mediative Gedanken
Pingback: 19 Essays on ‘Galileo’s Error’ – Conscience and Consciousness - Nobodys word