Chalmers’ Hard Problem and the Living Moment of Now

A story and a challenge for the philosophically minded.

A Thesis Challenging the Descartes-Nagel-Chalmers "Consciousness" Paradigm

Presented to the Fort Lewis College Philosophy Club in Durango

If you’ve plunged into the philosophical arena of human consciousness, I think we’d agree—if on nothing else—that the expert dialogue is a great big ball of confusion. After all, in a 2024 survey by Robert Kuhn, there are 325 competing philosophical and scientific theories of consciousness. That’s not theories closing in on understanding; that’s 325 opinions that don’t convince any peers.

At the head of this ball of confusion is the Descartes-Nagel-Chalmers paradigm, summed up in Chalmers’ Hard Problem of Consciousness: Why and how do physical processes in the brain (neural activity) give rise to subjective experience? What is it like to be something? How does matter become thought?

Writer Marvin Von Renchler excellently summarizes the flaw in the Hard Problem: “Rather than demonstrate a separation between physical processes and subjective experience, it is assumed.”

Biologically, everything we observe points to continuity: increasingly complex systems of memory, integration and self-referential processing emerging stepwise under selection pressures. There is no clear place for something non-physical to be introduced.

Von Renchler concludes that, “The ‘hard problem’ is less an unsolved mystery and more a framing issue, a mismatch between philosophical categories and how evolved systems actually work.”

There’s another objection I’ve yet to receive a serious response to: Why search for our mind wholly within our brain in the first place?

Conflict between storyteller and science telling.

 

During one of this morning’s walks with my Maddy dog–musing on my current project, Thomas Nagel’s iconic essay, “What is it like to be a bat?”–I had a defining insight regarding the conflict I feel–as a life long science enthusiast and follower–with theology and philosophy.

Even though they also interest me, however in the same way art and music impress me, not in any self-defining manner the way serious science does.

Press enter or click to view image in full si

On the one side we have,

the storyteller, confident in the stories created from within one’s mind. Using the outside world as a prop upon which to tell a provocative spellbinding tale. Glorifying in the unsurpassed genius of our own spectacular mind.

versus,

the observer, collecting evidence, and allowing the facts to create and dictate our story. Demanding honesty and suppressing our natural ego driven bias as much as possible.

Press enter or click to view image in full siz

Physical Reality ~ Human Mind divide

I suggest it’s the most fundamental observation that can be made regarding our human condition, it provides a realistically intellectual foundation to build a down-to-Earth, bottom-up understanding.

Awestruck Scientist responded:

Even though they also interest me, however in the same way art and music impress me, not in any self-defining manner the way serious science does.

I agree on two accounts, and disagree on one:
I agree with putting theology and philosophy in the same category as art and music - they all arise subjectively.
I agree with the distinction between storyteller and observer, which I would call the subjective and the objective.
I disagree with the notion (I hope I am not misinterpreting here you) that the observer is somehow more relevant than the storyteller. For me they are equally important and true, as long as they don't attempt to usurp the truth claim of the other perspective.

My response:
that the observer is somehow more relevant than the storyteller.
A.S., good point and thanks for making it!
I agree, storytelling is one of humanity's most important advances, I'm not questioning that.
This is about the source of authority used by the authors of the respective styles of storytelling, that I want to shine a klieg light on.
The philosophizing, and literary, storyteller follows their muse, molding their own story and emotions out of their own mind-scapes, as they strive to create, and perhaps share as hopefully, spellbinding stories. They are the masters of their world and their stories.
On the other hand, the scientist story teller is confined to following the known evidence as they plot the outlines and themes of their stories.
As science advances, new evidence comes in, often absolutely unanticipated, and radically rearranging the story. The scientific story honors, by striving to honestly reflection the actual factual, up to date, evidence that the best and the brightest have gathered and shared.
The philosophical. theological, and literary storytelling is all about human ego, wanting to be heard. It's beautiful, I'm right in there with the rest of us who strive to write well and meaningfully, and hope that someone notices.
Still we must understand scientific story telling is all about striving to understand this world we were born into based on solid physical evidence, and about ourselves in the bargain. That's what I owe all my allegiance to.
It's why I identify as an Earth-centrist.
Earth Centrism = Geocentrism. Seriously?
The Missing Key to Stephen Gould’s “Nonoverlapping Magisteria.”
Cheers & have a good weekend.

The Meaning of Jesus of Nazareth Considered.

 Over at CFI Forum a thread was started under that title, regarding the historicity of Jesus. That is, was Jesus once an actual flesh and blood person? It reminded me of an article Tanner wrote Nov 15, 2025, There’s No Real Evidence for Jesus. Truth or Myth? I read it a couple weeks ago and it keeps coming back to mind. The two have rekindled my interest in trying to formulate and share a comprehensible Earth-centrist’s perspective on Jesus.

Why did Jesus become and remain the ultimate superstar for so many?

What to make of the evidence regarding Jesus of Nazareth’s physical reality–in relation to all the stories added onto his memory (long after his life was finished), that increasingly deify Jesus?

Press enter or click to view image in full size

Stained glass, Jesus on Mt. Tabor, at Tabor Church, Chicago. ©Beatriz Romero

To give the “moral of this story” substance, I need to start by sharing some background. Being an Earth-centrist I can’t relate to the obsession with theological writings & debates. It is all too much talk for talk, for me. That doesn’t mean I’m oblivious to Christianity and Jesus. Still, the last time I actually wrestled with Jesus’s meaning was as a teen and 20s. After that, Earth and her evolution took over my heart and soul, and there was no looking back for me.

Considering Things Science Can Explain About Consciousness.

"Without deeply, personally appreciating the Pageant of Evolution, trying to ask, and answer, these deep existential questions is like playing basketball in zero gravity."

"Dr. Mark Solms makes it clear: … Modern science shows us that our mind is best understood as “a reflection of your body communicating with itself.” "

"Consider that momentous invention some four billion years ago of the Krebs cycle. Here on Earth, when geology and chemistry learned how to harness electricity, thereby giving birth to this Krebs cycle, which in turn gave birth to biology. There you’ll find the difference between a rock and living creature." 

Introduction

In Defense of Women. postcard advocacy campaign v.3

 I haven't written much on our climate situation because basically it's become too damned depressing.  Still I haven't totally disengaged,  the future unfolds slowly, so we must still be concerned with making this world a better place.  Even if the long term outlook doesn't bear speaking about, we are here living out our day to days now - so issues such a woman's right to self defense and sovereignty over her own body - still matter and are worth struggling for.  My effort started with the previous post, and has progressed through version.2 and a version.3.

In defense of women.  

A postcard advocacy campaign.

I have a dream that someday our society can learn to recognize and acknowledge the woman, above all others, possesses the situational awareness, and the moral, ethical, and legal standing to decide the future of the growing life within herself.

I myself can never figure out how/why people can be so cold and ruthless as to deny a woman those fundamental dignities, though I’ve spend decades trying.  As a man with a wife and children and grandchildren, including caretaking infants and toddlers, whom I get along with quite well I might add, it matters to me that there’s been so much manufactured misunderstanding.

That’s why I've taken the challenge to refine my personal argument “In Defense of Women”.

It took a while, you know how it goes, rewrite, rewrite, rewrite, now after 250@v.1 (Nov 6, $109) and 1000@v.2 (Jan 24, $155).   I do believe v.3 finally says all I want to share, as concise and well as I can.  Last month I ordered up 2,000 postcards (at $220).  Postage Stamps $0.53@

In Defense of Women, v.3

 

Now I’m hoping, I’m asking, I’ll even plead, for some help with purchasing postage stamps so I can broadcast these thoughts, by sending out these postcards in defense of a woman's right to self defense and sovereignty over her own body.  

I’m starting to address the postcards, first to various woman’s organizations, followed by Democratic Party county offices in key states, various reporters and news agencies, among others, (Help with some stamps and I’ll send them to any addresses you ask me to.).  After the election I want to send one to all 119th Congressional US Senators and Representatives.  With a little luck, add a little ammo to the coming debates.

I may be a man of big dreams, but modest means.  Without help for some folks who support these ideas I’m striving to share, the postcards will only be trickling out.  Please help me turn up the volume.

If we aren’t changing minds, we are losing.

Thank you, Peter Miesler

Email: Citizenschallenge at gmail

Please help at GoFundMe

10/10 - Dialogue with "Buddha Science" - Conclusion (Steve Daut)

 

_____________________________________________

Chapter 9, Buddha Science, Conclusion

_____________________________________________

edited Dec 3, 2023

Chapter 9a, Conclusion, Say again?

¶a2  “… The best we have is concepts.  The “real” problem is that we get so enamored of our concepts that we begin to believe they are reality. …”

I say it differently: Getting lost within one’s mindscape.

¶a3  “… to refresh your memory, these Buddha Science observations are interconnection, karma, impermanence, and illusion.

As we have seen, the idea of interconnection is simply that everything is connected to everything else. …”

¶a5  “… Complexity studies involve the idea of emergence, whereby new properties emerge from the complex interaction of many simple processes. …”

This is why taking the time to learn about Evolution is so important, because its insights have direct relevance to your self and how you get along with your self, your body.  That is your internal dialogue, and dealing with your world?

¶a5  “… Biology tells us that we are collection of part from all over the universe, and that our bodies are the result of eons of evolutionary development.  Consciousness itself may be an emergent property resulting from the interconnection of the human (body-)brain, experience, and meant formation. …”

I’m uncomfortable with that wording.   

Our Earth’s constituent atoms, and minerals that do come from all over the universe, but then we have some mind boggling mineral evolution, then biology and life, that’s all homegrown, here on Earth. That’s big, and we don’t know of anything in the universe that can hold a candle to this planet Earth.  

When are we going to own that - and start feeling a little pride for being a self-aware (or not) inhabitant of this overwhelming Earth with its biosphere and hydrosphere and cryosphere of interwoven always evolving life?

¶a7  “Ecology shows us the complex interconnections of organisms with their environment. Not only is the organism dependent on the conditions of the environment, but the condition of the environment itself is inextricably connected to and dependent upon the organism that exist within it.  And these system are also dependent on their past, including all the evolutionary changes and interconnections that occurred to give them their current configurations of entices and functions. …”

Nicely said, worth repeating.

9/10 Dialogue with "Buddha Science" - Science of the Mind (Steve Daut)

_____________________________________________________

Chapter 8, Buddha Science, Science of the mind

_____________________________________________________

Chapter 8a, Science of the mind, 

To be or not to be an animal?

¶a1  “Ever since Darwin began the evolution revolution, we have struggled to apply or reject “survive of the fittest” to the progress of society . …”

¶a2  “The middle way of Buddhism escapes this dilemma by taking the approach that if we see and recognize our true (Buddha) nature we’ll understand that our animal nature does not give us a true picture of Reality.   

Think about those words, our “Buddha nature” and our "Animal nature.”  What do they actually say about what we are?  

Animal nature sounds like something bestowed upon us.  But the fact is, we are evolved biological sensing creatures.  Our bodies are animal nature through and through.  

Our bodies and brains are much like most other mammalian brains, but with a slight twist that made all the difference in the world.  Perhaps this is the source of our developed Buddha Nature.

Folds within folds.  Rather than simply being aware of our world, we gained the facility to remember, to file away, to recall with increasing efficiency.  We enhanced those facilities with effective learning, weaving together memories, calculating into the future and dreaming.  Each advance building upon previous achievements. 

Until our human/Buddha mind learned to tame, or at least strive to somewhat tame our animal nature.

¶  “We’ll see that our thoughts and ideas are merely conceptions, a result of causes and conditions. …”

8/10 Dialogue with "Buddha Science" - Science of Life (Steve Daut)

_____________________________________

Chapter 7, Buddha Science, Science of Life

(edited July 29)

__________________________________________________

       

Chapter 7a, Science of Life, That’s life, I can’t deny it

¶a1  “Let’s begin with the most fundamental question: What is life, exactly?  Peter Ward, “Life as We Do Not Know It,”  … life is an emergent quality of a complex system, … 

¶a2  “Carl Sagan and trying to define life.  It’s been impossible.  Capacity to change, ¶4 division between living and non-living, …”

It’s a good question, but what do the answers actually offer us regular people in regard to our normal lives?

We live and experience.  We know what life is and what death looks like, and what non-living material looks like, and that sometimes the boundaries get momentarily blurry.  

Then the hair splitting can begin.  One could argue, biological life is never “dead” because, for instance, once a person dies, the microbial world takes over with an explosion of life forms that inhabit and consume the carcass, transforming it’s tissue back into constituent living biological elements, that are then reabsorbed into the next life form to come along.  There is also time.  It can turn living creatures into life-less rock fossils, only to be ground up again, then absorbed and utilized by another living creatures and so on.  

Still, for regular people why over complicate, or over dramatize?  Life has more interesting aspects for wondering about.

¶a6  “Life in either sense requires balance, a chain of causes and conditions that allow life to emerge and sustain itself. … James Lovelock, Gaia Theory, Earth as interconnected complex living organism…”