Consciousness is a property. There has to be some "thing" to be conscious, usually some living thing. So, until you were a thing - i.e. some time after conception, not birth - you were not conscious.
Genesis suggests a lot of things that are not true.
No. Pretty much the opposite - i.e. no consciousness without biology.
Well, the only term I would change is "truth" and I would change it to "fact", the truth is that nothing can be verified unless it is you verifying your own existence, cause that is the only truth we truly know and can verify. I do believe in an external world, but I don't believe that it is much different than our internal one, just a different manifestation, but it relies on the same thing; consciousness. What consciousness is in respect to the external world I don't know, it should mean the basics of our own consciousness but could have completely different characteristics otherwise, fundamentally it would be to know of existence, and it would imply a subject to that knowledge. In my view, the universe just wouldn't have any place to be otherwise, there wouldn't be anything to discern it from nothing.
Or what about John 1 "In the beginning was the word", the word is logos, logic, knowledge, order and reason. The philosophy that the main principle for the universe is logic and order, which was formed from the chaos before it. It isn't unreasonable that consciousness is a property of the formation of logic and order. With formation I don't mean static order, or static knowledge, but the action of bringing order and the action of using knowledge, I think that in that process consciousness manifests itself as the inherent meaning of that knowledge.
That the laws of physics allow for things to exist seems very reasonable and doesn't go against anything that I believe either. What strikes me is that imagining a world without any consciousness is the same as nothing. I mean it's so deeply nothing that I can't see in what WAY something exists (even laws or whatever else). At all. It's so difficult to explain but I know that there's something to learn here.For me it means the laws of physics allow the various anything's around us to exist
What does it mean - if by this phase you are referring to an ending emerging out of a random beginning, I doubt this will be so
What is a cognitive system anyway? Does it need to be a brain? Sure, if we talk about complex reasoning or reasoning about things, but for the simple awareness of existing alone?
"been a while", "formed", "change", all of these doesn't really mean anything without consciousness do they? What does it mean to have "been a while"? Been a while for whom? There is no universal time in the universe, no time from where it has been a while. That we can form words doesn't mean that they tell us anything. We have to consider the framing of what we are trying to describe here. We have no understanding of what the universe is like without consciousness. Sure, we can pretend and imagine the universe at different states in the past as if we were there looking at it, or as if we paint that image on some mental canvas representing space, but we truly have no idea of what it is actually like.
I'm not saying that consciousness is in any way seperated from that which arose, I'm saying that consciousness is most likely the foundation of every bit of existence, including that which arose, consciousness is what determines what exists and what doesn't exist.
I'm saying though that consciousness is at the very heart of stuff, the fact that it exists is itself consciousness.
What is the physical construction for the anthropic principle? It is a physical principle but there is no tangible fabric to work with, it exists purely as an idea that manifest itself by physical properties that follow that idea. Consciousness is like that, we can infer that it exists, not through physical measurement, but by the fact that we are consciousness and this is the basis for what we know as our existence (the only basis we know), there is no reason not to assign consciousness to other things that exists.
Might be unanswerable, we think that dogs are conscious because they are like us in some ways, the less like us things are the less conscious we think that they are. But we really have no idea, everything could be conscious in its own way.I know that there's something to learn here.
Me thinks in thou thinking you have come to the question, I think is unanswerable
How can inanimate substances become animate and further along become conscious? Moving up to
consciousness (consciousness is thinking about thinking)
I would agree if you mean conscious in a not conscious sort of way. For example it doesn't seem like a piece of felspar has many thoughts or feelings.
Indeed, neither am I saying that a rock is thinking anything, or feeling anything (if existence itself could not be described as a feeling of sorts).
That is the part that is silly and demonstrably wrong.
I'm not sure what your argument is. Obviously animals are conscious, otherwise they would just be lying on the ground, so there actually is a physical need for consciousness.