Nope. If you want to say anything (matter, rocks) exist before consciousness, you’re going to have to prove it first. Else, you’re insisting on a materialist dogma.
Just because the idea is novel to you personally, doesn’t mean it’s outlandish.
No that’s not how science works, there is no evidence that consciousness existed before matter whereas there is plenty that matter existed before consciousness. Your extraordinary claim that it does requires evidence which you haven’t provided.
If you were to provide anything tangible to go on rather than reiterating your point I might consider it further. If not it’s actually yourself pursuing unfounded idealist theories.
It’s not novel to me, I’ve heard other spiritualists spout similar nonsense many times before.
Everything you’re describing is something that appeared in consciousness and was then put to words, which are not reality, just symbols pointing to an experience inside consciousness.
You’re doing the science sounding equivalent of the Christian “god is real, says so in the bible, and bible was written by god, therefore it’s true”.
Also your education is not too good on the matter if you think I’m saying anything new. This philosophical stance has been around for centuries. I’ve already pointed to idealism.
So you are now just arguing for solipsism which tells us nothing about the universe and is unfalsifiable. Science is what we can agree on as a shared reality, not whatever comes into your head or what someone random wrote down. It’s not dogma, it’s verifiable and if there was enough to evidence to the contrary I’d consider changing my mind.
I don’t think you’re saying anything new, quite the opposite, I’m just saying everything you believe is nonsense as are the scriptures you and other “philosophers” (spiritualists) have been wasting your time on for centuries.
I’m not arguing for solipsism, as I said in my initial post. I’m pointing out that your “shared reality” is only “shared” because consciousness makes it so. Idealism doesn’t deny the external world; it says the “external” is already a construct of mind. Your objection assumes matter is the default, but that’s the very premise in question. Science can’t falsify idealism because it relies on observation, and observation is consciousness in action. You’re using the tools of matter to dismiss what makes tools (and matter) intelligible in the first place.
The argument isn’t if rocks have individual consciousness.
The fact is that rocks exist inside consciousness.
Universe-is-a-brain theory, got it.
Trouble is the burden of proof lies with you on that.
Nope. If you want to say anything (matter, rocks) exist before consciousness, you’re going to have to prove it first. Else, you’re insisting on a materialist dogma.
Just because the idea is novel to you personally, doesn’t mean it’s outlandish.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism
No that’s not how science works, there is no evidence that consciousness existed before matter whereas there is plenty that matter existed before consciousness. Your extraordinary claim that it does requires evidence which you haven’t provided.
If you were to provide anything tangible to go on rather than reiterating your point I might consider it further. If not it’s actually yourself pursuing unfounded idealist theories.
It’s not novel to me, I’ve heard other spiritualists spout similar nonsense many times before.
“plenty that matter existed before consciousness”
Prove it. Prove that anything exists outside consciousness right now, that isn’t just an appearance inside consciousness.
“Prove it”
That’s not how science works either. Nothing is 100% proved but we have enough evidence to suggest it is way more likely than your theory:
You could speculate about anything but without evidence you’re just making up your own form of religion mixed with solipsism.
Everything you’re describing is something that appeared in consciousness and was then put to words, which are not reality, just symbols pointing to an experience inside consciousness.
You’re doing the science sounding equivalent of the Christian “god is real, says so in the bible, and bible was written by god, therefore it’s true”.
Also your education is not too good on the matter if you think I’m saying anything new. This philosophical stance has been around for centuries. I’ve already pointed to idealism.
So you are now just arguing for solipsism which tells us nothing about the universe and is unfalsifiable. Science is what we can agree on as a shared reality, not whatever comes into your head or what someone random wrote down. It’s not dogma, it’s verifiable and if there was enough to evidence to the contrary I’d consider changing my mind.
I don’t think you’re saying anything new, quite the opposite, I’m just saying everything you believe is nonsense as are the scriptures you and other “philosophers” (spiritualists) have been wasting your time on for centuries.
I’m not arguing for solipsism, as I said in my initial post. I’m pointing out that your “shared reality” is only “shared” because consciousness makes it so. Idealism doesn’t deny the external world; it says the “external” is already a construct of mind. Your objection assumes matter is the default, but that’s the very premise in question. Science can’t falsify idealism because it relies on observation, and observation is consciousness in action. You’re using the tools of matter to dismiss what makes tools (and matter) intelligible in the first place.