Last night I was reading an essay called What Consciousness Is Not by Raymond Tallis. (because this is what I do in the middle of the might when I'm not wandering loose with a camera :p) It's a well thought out criticism of The Character Of Consciousness by David Chalmers. A particular bit from the essay caught my attention:
"what is the difference between the proto-phenomenal properties of a non-sentient pebble and the phenomenal experiences of a frog, or the experiences of a fully sentient and thought-filled human being? What is it that enables the merely proto-phenomenal properties that supposedly pervade the air around us to become fully phenomenal properties when we breathe that air in and it becomes part of our brains?"
It caught my attention, because recently, there was an incident where I was called upon to justify my spiritual beliefs. I didn't bother, as I feel belief or non-belief are personal matters. The confrontation did give me pause for thought, though. I believe the way I do because of how I feel. Even though it may fly in the face of science, it meets a need for me that other things can't. That much is obvious, and I daresay this is the case for many, whether that faith is in the spiritual realm or logic.
It's not something that worries me overmuch. I'm content to accept that I don't really know anything about anything, Still, my spiritual beliefs must satisfy a need all the same, otherwise I wouldn't have them. But what is the need? There is a question my beliefs must be answering for me on a deeper level.
That's why I was so happy to run across the quote above last night. That's the question my beliefs answer for me. As much as I enjoy pondering hard questions, thanks to my illogical, emotional spirituality I don't have to lie awake at night fretting over that puzzle.
No comments:
Post a Comment