The blog tries to present a quest of exploring the nature of reality, consciousness, and existence from philosophical and metaphysical perspectives. It all started with a seemingly simple idea I was grappling with: if subject and object share a common base in consciousness, does that logically negate the idea of “real” subjects and “real” objects? It’s because they become “interconnected“, defined by each other or “dependent” on the base. How can a subject exist without something to perceive, or an object exist without a perceiver? The boundaries between subject and object become blurred.
The act of observation influences the observed, and the observer is in turn influenced by the observed.
There’s a counter argument, a materialist view. Matter is primary, and consciousness is just an emergent property of complex physical processes, like those in our brains. This holds that a tree falling in the forest makes a sound regardless of anyone being there. This view also has a firm explanation for all the observable phenomenon due to the tool “causality“. This tool is absent in non dual perspective. Also, it is the consciousness that is “evolved” to enhance survival and reproduction. Totally a scientific method.
I feel that if matter exists independently of the observer, who validated its existence? Science, even though is empirical, it needs to be validated in mind through experience. What is “evidence” after all without a mind to experience and understand the results? By the way, there’s a dialogue between Tagore and Einstein which is an indirect reference of this blog’s enquiry.
Materialist: Evidence is “independent” of the observer. Matter leaves its trace as can be seen from fossils, geological formations. This proves matter existed in past. The laws of Physics don’t change and are consistent, regardless of whether there’s any observer. Alright. Can one then prove there’s no observer (consciousness) at all? It’s difficult, right? Then does matter really exist independent of consciousness?
Again the follow up question is who decides it’s bird’s non human consciousness or let’s say a bird’s consciousness? Or even for that matter, who agrees with the “fact” that there’s no observer whatsoever that time? What is a bird and where does it get conceptualised? Every fact remains a fact only when conceptualised. In mind!
If consciousness is emergent phenomenon, what’s its base? In matter. Right? What’s the matter? It’s a result of collapsing a wave function at the time it’s observed. Before that was it a matter? So again coming to the starting question. What’s the base of consciousness for it to be termed emergent? Brain activity? How does it give rise to subjective experience of pain and pleasure? No way. So does observation require consciousness?
Space and time are often considered fundamental to our understanding of matter. An object exists somewhere (space) and somewhen (time). It’s said that space and time are intertwined. And that’s why called spacetime. Again quantum mechanics says spacetime may not be continous or well defined. Will they be then the bases of reality? If there’s no observer, there would be no relativity.
I am absolutely novice in all these intricate physics. I can’t understand gravity, however my question is where does the gravity get “understood” as a fundamental field? In Einstein’s mind perhaps? Again Einstein says gravity is caused by mass and energy. If we say spacetime is shaped by mass and energy and in turn mass is imparted to particles interacting with Higg’s field, then what is Higg’s field? Does it exist on its own?
There are massless particles as well like photons. Do they not interact with Higg’s field? Do they become “more” fundamental then? If these fields called as Higg’s, electromagnetic, nuclear and gravitational field are the sole bases of existence, or in other words, we refer anything within the realm spanned by these fields, then everything we refer has to have coordinates. Now if there is a particle that doesn’t interact with “any” of these fields, then what are its coordinates? Is there anything that lies “outside“?
We know that dark matter and dark energy exist, but they don’t interact with these fields. They remain a mystery. Is it possible that there are aspects of reality that are beyond our current capacity to comprehend or describe?
Reinvent The Self! 