Re: O'Reilly shows us we can't have religion in sc
Existence can be a rather subjective proposition. The words I’ve quoted from your post [above] suggest that there is an entity requesting proof. Underlying that concept, I am curious to know if you think that your personal consciousness somehow emerges from the matter of your being or whether consciousness is perhaps a fundamental property of all matter? More succinctly, how can you prove that you exist?
I've seen this little mind game played before. The idea that, since a person can not know how another interprets and experiences the world, the only thing any one person can know with absolute certainty is their own existence, but how does one go and offer such proof to those who may not experience and interpret the world the same way?
Yeah, it's a funky little think game, but is a question of philosophy, not science. Just like "if a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" Interesting philosophical debate, but holds absolutely no debate in science: yes, it makes a sound - a falling tree releases energy, compressing air which forms sound waves that travel through the atmosphere at a rate of about 343 meters per second.
Now, as far as where personal consciousness emerges: from the human brain, of course. Consciousness, self awareness, "existing", all are simply a product of specific interactions between biochemical agents (hormones, electrolytes, etc), action potential currents along neurons, and target cells that make up the mechanism by which the human brain functions. The fact that we are able to use such biological mechanisms to label the self awareness of existence as "consciousness" allows for the creation of the types of thinking games you have proposed but does not make it anything more than just a series of chemical reactions taking place in your cranium. I also think that because "consciousness" is an inherent part of being a living creature with the evolutionary capability of being "conscious" as defined by humans, because it is something we are never without, there are so many questions raised about death, about what happens to the "consciousness" when the biological mechanisms responsible for it no longer function. I believe it is that question that has been the building block of nearly every religion we see today. I did happen to find an extremely satisfying answer to this question, an answer, I have found, infinitely more comforting than the promise of eternal heaven via specific conditions or the threat of eternal hell via insubordination towards those conditions. It is a lovely quote by Mark Twain, who said "I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions of years before I was born and did not suffer the slightest inconvenience from it." That is a perfect answer to the question of what happens when you die. Your experience after your life ends will be exactly the same as your experience was before your life began.
Now, on the topic of consciousness, as it applies to all of matter (I am talking of matter as defined by physics): Consciousness, as defined by humans, is not inherent to all matter because all matter is not made up of a specific interactions between biochemical agents (hormones, electrolytes, etc), action potential currents along neurons, and target cells that make up the mechanism by which the human brain functions. If you want to see consciousness as emerging from the matter of my being, that's I think a valid point, but no more significant than my finger nails emerging as a matter of my being or the function of my heart or liver. It's all just a bunch of complicated biological functions that are the result of billions of years of evolution.
It may be discomforting to some that their entire existence is just a series of complex biochemical reactions, and it is natural to have a somewhat grander idea of what makes a person who they are (hence "consciousness", a soul, the belief that we were created in the image of our creator - an all powerful eternal god, etc), but, at least for me, an understanding of the principles behind the complex system (such as a human being) does not diminish the inherent value I have for that system (namely, human life). Taking it one step further, even the understanding that the value I have for my life and the lives of others is just another evolutionarily developed advantage meant to further the prorogation of our species does not diminish the meaning of the value that I have.
Now, to answer your question: how can I prove I exist? In philosophy, I can't. In science, a non-doctored photograph would do just fine.
