NationStates Jolt Archive

The entire ecosphere is one huge web of life, interdependent, mutually supportive, inseparable. This can be scientifically verified. Yet humans, and perhaps to a different degree dolphins, seem to be the only living things possessed with a concept of "self," something which cannot be scientifically verified. What is this? Illusion? A step on the road to some sort of "higher consciousness?" What???

The entire ecosphere is one huge web of life, interdependent, mutually supportive, inseparable. This can be scientifically verified. Yet humans, and perhaps to a different degree dolphins, seem to be the only living things possessed with a concept of "self," something which cannot be scientifically verified. What is this? Illusion? A step on the road to some sort of "higher consciousness?" What???

Well, to take it from a purely scientific perspective, our individuality comes from the fact that the nervous system of one person is not connected to that of another person.

Individuality is the only concrete notion we have. The self is the only thing a person can be be sure exists.

Physically, it's virtually impossible to be truly individual - you will almost certainly need to rely on someone or something, for example, for food (unless you can produce it yourself) or shelter(ditto).
Other than that, it is possible to be individual. In fact, it's almost impossible not to be. Everyone has different tastes. I prefer darker girls; I'm sure there are many guys (or girls) on here who prefer blondes. I don't like peanuts, but again, I'm sure there are many people who do. It's small things like this that differentiate ourselves from each other.
However, it's not that we have a concept of 'self' which allows us to be individual - it is our individuality that allows us to entertain the concept of a 'self'. I personally don't believe that this leads (or indeed, can lead) to any form of higher consciousness - I don't believe there is such a thing.

The entire ecosphere is one huge web of life, interdependent, mutually supportive, inseparable. This can be scientifically verified. Yet humans, and perhaps to a different degree dolphins, seem to be the only living things possessed with a concept of "self," something which cannot be scientifically verified. What is this? Illusion? A step on the road to some sort of "higher consciousness?" What???
I think apes do too. For example, some animals see their reflection in a mirror and assume it's another animal of the same species. They may try to attack the mirror. Chimps figure out that it's a reflection of their own image and use it to examine themselves.

Is individuality an illusion?

Nah.

It is larger brain size which allows us to conceive of and deal with abstract concepts such as "self." This is why animals with relatively small brains don't seem to exhibit self-recognizing behavior.

Individuality is a cruel trick of evolution. If we were more like ants or bees, a superorganism composed of thousands or millions of individual bodies, we'd accomplish more. Also I've never seen a bee that looked lonely or depressed. Well, where nature has failed us human ingenuity will triumph. Nationalism can give us our proper status as faceless, interchangable parts of a greater whole.

What is this? Illusion?
*rolls d20*

I disbelieve!! Uh... *vanishes*

Hehe, one of the creepiest things about self-awareness is, there's really no way to distinguish between 'true' self-awareness, and just something in your brain telling you that you're self-aware. The brain is an absolutely wonderful liar. :D

No, but due to certain quantum effects, reality is an illusion.:p

*rolls d20*

I disbelieve!! Uh... *vanishes*

Hehe, one of the creepiest things about self-awareness is, there's really no way to distinguish between 'true' self-awareness, and just something in your brain telling you that you're self-aware. The brain is an absolutely wonderful liar. :D
Welcome to the lunatic fringe of abstract thought... do not under any circumstances drink the punch and be careful around the floral patterned sofas that may or may not be slabs of granite made from cheese.

I'd say most of us are individuals:

Brian: Please, please, please listen! I've got one or two things to say.
The Crowd: Tell us! Tell us both of them!
Brian: Look, you've got it all wrong! You don't NEED to follow ME, You don't NEED to follow ANYBODY! You've got to think for your selves! You're ALL individuals!
The Crowd: Yes! We're all individuals!
Brian: You're all different!
The Crowd: Yes, we ARE all different!
Man in crowd: I'm not...
The Crowd: Sch!

Well, to take it from a purely scientific perspective, our individuality comes from the fact that the nervous system of one person is not connected to that of another person.
Neither are those of most animals, but they don't seem to have the same sense of separateness. [ quizzical look ]

Individuality is the only concrete notion we have. The self is the only thing a person can be be sure exists.
Oh? And your proof of this is???

I personally don't believe that this leads (or indeed, can lead) to any form of higher consciousness - I don't believe there is such a thing.
There's considerable research involving identical twins that would tend to refute your position on this.

Nah.
LOL! Pithy to a fault as usual, I see! :D

Olara']It is larger brain size which allows us to conceive of and deal with abstract concepts such as "self." This is why animals with relatively small brains don't seem to exhibit self-recognizing behavior.
This is probably true, but it still doesn't explain what individuality is or why we have it. Self-awareness is only part of the issue.

For all I know, all that exists is me and the rest of the universe is just some kind of sick, twisted dream. That would mean there are no individuals.

Individuality is a cruel trick of evolution. If we were more like ants or bees, a superorganism composed of thousands or millions of individual bodies, we'd accomplish more. Also I've never seen a bee that looked lonely or depressed. Well, where nature has failed us human ingenuity will triumph. Nationalism can give us our proper status as faceless, interchangable parts of a greater whole.
IMHO, nationalism is only one more step on the road to recognition of the entire human race as one big family, and beyond that, to the recognition that all that lives is our responsibility as a race. Expand your horizons, Grasshopper! :)

No, but due to certain quantum effects, reality is an illusion.:p
I disagree. What we know as reality is a result of our limited abilities at perception.

I'd say most of us are individuals:
LOL! More to the Python than meets the eye! :D

For all I know, all that exists is me and the rest of the universe is just some kind of sick, twisted dream. That would mean there are no individuals.
Yay! It's like Descartes without the last four meditations! Those were a waste of time, anyway.

For all I know, all that exists is me and the rest of the universe is just some kind of sick, twisted dream. That would mean there are no individuals.
[ walks up and Jap-slaps the shit outta you! ] Now ... say that again, please! :D

Olara']Yay! It's like Descartes without the last four meditations! Those were a waste of time, anyway.
Descartes was a dweeb. :D

The entire ecosphere is one huge web of life, interdependent, mutually supportive, inseparable. This can be scientifically verified. Yet humans, and perhaps to a different degree dolphins, seem to be the only living things possessed with a concept of "self," something which cannot be scientifically verified. What is this? Illusion? A step on the road to some sort of "higher consciousness?" What???
If you are refering to "conscious" individuality, you'll have to define it more clearly. For instance, current definitions are giving researchers absolute fits, because they leave us in a situation where an adult chimp is a conscious individual while a human child of 4 years old is not...how do we reconcile that with our laws/rules regarding humans and animals?

However, as a random thought: the human brain, unlike virtually all other brains, has evolved to place tremendous emphasis on adaptability. Most animal brains contain a set of pre-determined programs with a finite number of potential outcomes to any given situation. In contrast, the human brain has largely discarded these programs, and even those that remain are subject to conscious controls in most cases. The reason for this is that it increases adaptability; if you respond purely on instinct based on the programs your species carries, then a radical change in your environment can be fatal because you will be forced to follow an "obsolete" program.

So where am I going with this? Well, I personally think that human individuality is a direct offshoot of this pressure for adaptability. We are designed for adaptation, and since each of us receives slightly different inputs we will "adapt" (both consciously and unconsciously) in different ways. Because of our radically expanded sensory and association areas, we are all experiencing the world in very different (and very complex-ly different) ways, so the range of "adaptations" to our Self will be equally magnificent.

To me, human individuality is the logical result of how we live and experience our lives...it's a beautiful adaptation, but I would not call it "higher" any more than I would call a dog's improved olfaction a "higher" form of sensory perception. We are adapted to be what we are, and to function in the way we do, but "higher" is a purely subjective concept that relies on your individual context. Our individuality can be catastrophic in certain situations, but it can also be the most entertaining and delightful aspect of our existence.

There's considerable research involving identical twins that would tend to refute your position on this.
Ok...not that I don't believe you, but I'd like a link to something here :)

[ walks up and Jap-slaps the shit outta you! ] Now ... say that again, please! :D

What's Jap-slapping?

And since you asked, for all I know, all that exists is me and the rest of the universe is just some kind of sick, twisted dream. That would mean there are no individuals.

If you are refering to "conscious" individuality, you'll have to define it more clearly. For instance, current definitions are giving researchers absolute fits, because they leave us in a situation where an adult chimp is a conscious individual while a human child of 4 years old is not...how do we reconcile that with our laws/rules regarding humans and animals?

However, as a random thought: the human brain, unlike virtually all other brains, has evolved to place tremendous emphasis on adaptability. Most animal brains contain a set of pre-determined programs with a finite number of potential outcomes to any given situation. In contrast, the human brain has largely discarded these programs, and even those that remain are subject to conscious controls in most cases. The reason for this is that it increases adaptability; if you respond purely on instinct based on the programs your species carries, then a radical change in your environment can be fatal because you will be forced to follow an "obsolete" program.

So where am I going with this? Well, I personally think that human individuality is a direct offshoot of this pressure for adaptability. We are designed for adaptation, and since each of us receives slightly different inputs we will "adapt" (both consciously and unconsciously) in different ways. Because of our radically expanded sensory and association areas, we are all experiencing the world in very different (and very complex-ly different) ways, so the range of "adaptations" to our Self will be equally magnificent.

To me, human individuality is the logical result of how we live and experience our lives...it's a beautiful adaptation, but I would not call it "higher" any more than I would call a dog's improved olfaction a "higher" form of sensory perception. We are adapted to be what we are, and to function in the way we do, but "higher" is a purely subjective concept that relies on your individual context. Our individuality can be catastrophic in certain situations, but it can also be the most entertaining and delightful aspect of our existence.
Excellent exposition, as far as it goes, but it still leaves the question unanswered, IMHO. Regardless of whether individuality ( or concept of self ) is a "direct offshoot of this pressure for adaptability" or simply an evolutionary accident, it's still a mystery. Even though you have partially explained the "why," we still don't know if it's illusory or not.

Ok...not that I don't believe you, but I'd like a link to something here :)
I'll see if I can find one. There have been several programs on The Science Channel which go a long way toward proving that identical twins, and sometimes others, can sense things about each other over significant distances. There's more, but I'm not sure I can remember it sufficiently to do it justice here.

Excellent exposition, as far as it goes, but it still leaves the question unanswered, IMHO. Regardless of whether individuality ( or concept of self ) is a "direct offshoot of this pressure for adaptability" or simply an evolutionary accident, it's still a mystery. Even though you have partially explained the "why," we still don't know if it's illusory or not.
But that's my point: "illusory" is meaningless when you refer to subjective things like our individual perception of self. My subjective experience of the color red isn't "real" outside my own brain, just as my subjective experience of my Self is not "real" outside my brain. So what? Their function does not require that they be externally "real."

What's Jap-slapping?

And since you asked, for all I know, all that exists is me and the rest of the universe is just some kind of sick, twisted dream. That would mean there are no individuals.
LOL! A "Jap-slap" would be some sort of unarmed combat contact, perhaps Karate or Judo. :D The point I was trying to make, in my own inimitable style, is that a non-existent individual could not inflict pain on you. What ... EVER! ;)

But ... which would be the illusion, that there are no individuals or that the rest of the universe exists? Or perhaps your own sense of self is the true illusion? ;)

LOL! A "Jap-slap" would be some sort of unarmed combat contact, perhaps Karate or Judo. :D The point I was trying to make, in my own inimitable style, is that a non-existent individual could not inflict pain on you. What ... EVER! ;)

Au contraire, pain could just be another figment of my warped imagination.

But ... which would be the illusion, that there are no individuals or that the rest of the universe exists?
The former because of the latter.

Or perhaps your own sense of self is the true illusion? ;)
Fifth Month Second Letter.

If individuality is an illusion, I will happily keep deceiving myself!

I'll see if I can find one. There have been several programs on The Science Channel which go a long way toward proving that identical twins, and sometimes others, can sense things about each other over significant distances. There's more, but I'm not sure I can remember it sufficiently to do it justice here.
Ta very much :)
*doesn't get the Science Channel*

I have had cats that seemed to recognize themselves in the mirror...

Individuality is real, as far as we can ever know reality.

Of course, we are interdependent, but that is all we can be. Unless we were completely independent of the rest of the universe, uncreated, timeless beings...Gods!:D

Ta very much :)
*doesn't get the Science Channel*
That's a real shame. It's one of the few channels on TV worth watching.

I have had cats that seemed to recognize themselves in the mirror...

Individuality is real, as far as we can ever know reality.

Of course, we are interdependent, but that is all we can be. Unless we were completely independent of the rest of the universe, uncreated, timeless beings...Gods!:D
In a very real sense, we are gods. We can create, distance and time shrink for us, and our imaginations are totally unbounded. I have come to believe that humans, as sentient beings, represent the universe's eaons long progression toward self-awareness.

A counter-question: Even if we did (or do) participate in some sort of "higher consciousness", would that necessarily deny our individuality? Can't we be part of something larger than ourselves, and yet still remain our individual selves?

After all, a tree does not merge with any other trees when it becomes part of a forest - the tree is still one tree, easily distinguishable from any other tree in the forest. It's not any less of a tree because it's a member of and participant in this larger entity called a "forest". In fact, it's arguable that it may be more of a tree by being part of a forest.

Likewise, I am not my wife, she is not me, and neither one of us is our son. Yet all three of us are members of a larger entity called a "family", and we do not lose or diminish our individual identities by being part of this family.

So, if there is some "higher consciousness" to which we belong, or which we are evolving towards, why do so many people automatically assume that this means a loss of our individuality? Say "higher consciousness" and many people instantly assume "group mind", but it doesn't have to be so.

The Individual is a cultural construct.

Say "higher consciousness" and many people instantly assume "group mind", but it doesn't have to be so.
True. Sorry if I seemed to be implying that. Such was not my intent.

The Individual is a cultural construct.
Say more, please. What is a "cultural construct," and how does it follow that the individual is one?

The Individual is a cultural construct.
Culture is an Individual construct.

The entire ecosphere is one huge web of life, interdependent, mutually supportive, inseparable. This can be scientifically verified. Yet humans, and perhaps to a different degree dolphins, seem to be the only living things possessed with a concept of "self," something which cannot be scientifically verified. What is this? Illusion? A step on the road to some sort of "higher consciousness?" What???
I like to call it personality for the hell of it.

Neither are those of most animals, but they don't seem to have the same sense of separateness. [ quizzical look ]
Don't they? Even so (assuming that they dont) things are not always as they seem...

In a very real sense, we are gods. We can create, distance and time shrink for us, and our imaginations are totally unbounded.
Whether we can create or not (or merely transform and modify the already existing), it hardly seems a unique trait of humans. I dont see that we can know that other animals do not do likewise. I do not see that distance and time shrink for us, and how would we know whether or not our imaginations are bounded or not?

The Individual is a cultural construct.
Very much so.

A prime example is an individualistic culture.

Where people do or go so do you...

...unless you're one of those geeks that hang with eachothers...

:D

The entire ecosphere is one huge web of life, interdependent, mutually supportive, inseparable. This can be scientifically verified. Yet humans, and perhaps to a different degree dolphins, seem to be the only living things possessed with a concept of "self," something which cannot be scientifically verified. What is this? Illusion? A step on the road to some sort of "higher consciousness?" What???
Are you asking us this?

If so, then there is individuality.

Are you asking us this?

If so, then there is individuality.
You have some tightly reasoned, logically consistent rationale for this?

Arrgh it be true Individuality is a farce.

You have some tightly reasoned, logically consistent rationale for this?
There's you. Here's me.