by Joey Lawsin
 |
| Intuitive Aneural Network |
Many philosophical concepts—such as dualism, physicalism, panpsychism, functionalism, epiphenomenalism, theories of the mind, the explanatory gap, and the so-called "hard problem"—are often misunderstood due to fundamental flaws in their underlying ideas. The "hard problem," however, is arguably not hard at all—provided its proponents understand the origin, creation, and evolution of early information as explained by the theory of Information Codexation (I.C.). By applying I.C., and specifically its two foundational theories—the Caveman in the Box Theory and Human Mental Handicap—the philosophical missteps in studying the mind can be systematically addressed.
Joey Lawsin, in his works on I.C., introduces the concept of the Human Mental Handicap (also referred to as "Human Boundaries") to simplify the definition of consciousness. He contends that "no human can think of anything without labeling or associating his thought with something physical—be it an object, a word, or a description." This process of comparative labeling, or one-to-one correspondence, is central to what Lawsin terms the Lawsin Dictum, which he describes as the primary indicator of consciousness. According to his book Autognorics, consciousness, or Associative Consciousness (AC), is the ability to pair "x" with "y"—the capacity to associate abstract ideas with physical objects, or sensory input with its structural design. Without both x and y, consciousness cannot exist.
Furthermore, Lawsin differentiates consciousness from awareness. For instance, plants exhibit behaviors that suggest consciousness: they hear, smell, feel, and remember their surroundings, demonstrating an ability to associate stimuli with specific outcomes. For example, plants that can feel warmth can distinguish between hot and cold; those that react to sounds can differentiate between noise and music. Such associative abilities align with the concept of AC, leading to the conclusion that plants are conscious entities.
Similarly, animals without brains—such as sea anemones, sea squirts, and other creatures—demonstrate consciousness through their ability to adapt, hide, or change colors. Dogs, for example, associate objects like bowls, balls, and bones with concepts like food, play, and walk, showcasing their capacity for associative consciousness. This supports the idea that dogs, too, are conscious beings. His Bowlingual Experiment (Lawsin, 1988) delves into such neural associations in animals.
The Lawsin Dictum also provides a concise equation for consciousness: "If x is conscious with y, then x is conscious; otherwise, x by itself is not conscious". In Lawsin's words, "If I am conscious with my dog, then I am conscious. But if I exist entirely alone, without my dog or anyone else, then I would not be conscious". This means that consciousness necessitates two elements: a being and a surrounding (e.g., another being).
However, Lawsin emphasizes the distinction between consciousness and self-consciousness. While a plant may be conscious, it is unlikely to be self-conscious. Though plants exhibit advanced behaviors—such as releasing irritant powders to deter intruders, emitting odors to signal distress, or coordinating as a community—these behaviors simply denote awareness since they are equipped with biological sensors. Similarly, while dogs may not recognize themselves in a mirror, they demonstrate clear associative abilities, raising questions about the true nature of self-consciousness.
The key to both consciousness and self-consciousness, according to the principles of Originemology, lies in information codexation. Without the processes of acquiring, codifying, and associating information, neither consciousness nor self-consciousness can arise. These processes comprise the "procedural system" of consciousness: acquisition, association, codexation, and transmission. Information must undergo these steps for consciousness to emerge.
Thinking, as Lawsin explains, is a by-product of consciousness. While it is often equated with consciousness, it is not synonymous with existence—contrary to René Descartes’ famous assertion, "I think, therefore I exist." According to psychology, children under the age of three are not self-conscious, as their early cognitive processes primarily involve mimicry and imitation. Young animals, including puppies, similarly lack self-realization despite their ability to imitate.
Lawsin also raises the possibility that consciousness need not originate solely from the brain. In his work on The Silver Species, he proposes that consciousness might emerge from dermal networks—sensory systems like skin, scales, feathers, or roots that process information. Since the skin is the largest sensory organ in both plants and animals, it plays a pivotal role in responding to environmental stimuli. Whether self-consciousness arises from neural or dermal networks, or whether it is a simulated phenomenon as described in Lawsin's "Animation Effect" and "Xylophone Effect", remains a subject of profound exploration until the science of engineered life forms, referred to as Autognorics, was concpetualized.
The seven definitions of consciousness:
1. Consciousness is the ability to acquire information. (Definition-1, Lawsin 1988).
2. If I can match x with y, therefore I'm conscious. (Definition-2, Lawsin 1988).
3. Collaborative Determinants of Consciousness (Definition-3, Lawsin 1988).
4. Grand Script of Consciousness (Definition-4, Lawsin 1988).
5. Codexation (Definition-5, Lawsin 1988).
6. Algorithmic Animation (Definition-6, Lawsin 1988).
7. Information Codexation (Definition-7, Lawsin 1988).
The complete definitions of Consciousness can be found in the book Originemology by Joey Lawsin.
1. How did information emerge into the early minds of the very first humans?
2. Who supplied our primitive ancestors with information?
3. Where did it originate? Where did it come from?
4. Was the source of information a who or a what? Was it god, space aliens, or something else?
5. If a bat was also placed inside the box, would it develop consciousness?
In the experiment, the primary subject was a newborn baby who was placed in a box. He was a prehistoric son of a caveman who was kept at birth inside a special "room" with six walls as his only surroundings. He was forbidden ever to interact with the outside world, never allowed to see anyone nor hear anything entirely throughout the rest of his life. He was totally isolated from the world from birth to adulthood.
Parallel to this same scenario was another box — the box of the father, the first human on earth, the second subject of the experiment. He was also placed in isolation from birth to adulthood. The only difference between the father's box and the son’s box is that the father lives side by side with the natural world — a place surrounded by living and non-living things - plants, animals, water, sky, stars, and all other natural elements.
A third box was also in the picture — the box of a dog. Zero, a puppy of Alaskan malamute descent, who was also occupying the same environment as his master, was the third subject of the experiment. He was also isolated from birth to adulthood. The only difference between his box and his master's box was that he was an animal — a lower-life form.
By these 3 characters, more questions were raised like - Who among the three will acquire more information? Who will never acquire any information at all? Will they become aware of themselves? Will they become aware of their own surrounding? Will they figure out that they are alive? Will they understand the things surrounding them? How? How many pieces of information will they acquire? How will they know and understand them? How did they acquire the ability to associate physical objects with mental images or vice versa? Which minds will stay empty forever? Which brains will give rise to consciousness and self-consciousness? They are open questions that can be rationally answered by common sense observations, systematic inferences, and comparative analysis. Questions that will provide the definition of consciousness in its simplified form.
-QED-
How did humans acquire their ability to associate mental images with physical objects? Examining the second box, the father learned everything from his surroundings - the living environment. He saw how birds fly, how lions get their food, how deers drink water, and how every creature in his environment behaves, creates sounds, and lives life in their own ways. He eventually copied their actions and reactions. He began to mimic them. With these real-time experiences, bits of information were gradually building in his mind. Subsequently, these pieces of information were converted into some called knowledge. He then learned the art of judging and choosing, the concept of right and wrong, discovering and inventing new things, and converting abstract ideas to physical realities. Because of Mother Nature, he becomes a conscious being. Humans become conscious beings.
Note: Consciousness is defined here based on mainstream definitions. However, it is challenged and refuted here in my work on this link.
-------------------------A COMMON SENSE OBSERVATION -------------------------------
People don't realize that if they try to humanize a dog, a cat, a bird, or a bear, they are actually raising a human being in an animal suit. This might be a strong statement. But this is a fact. Humans and animals might be seen as two different species. But when they live side by side, with the same surroundings, they become actually two similar objects. When they are raised both in the same controlled environment like our homes, humans, and animals are emotionally, mentally, physically, and socially alike. How is this so?
Imagine that we are simultaneously raising two newborn beings: a puppy and a baby.
The baby lives in a house with her mother, father, and her brothers and sisters. The baby hears the sound of her mother's call, sees her mother's smile, feels her mother's touch, tastes her mother's milk, and even smells her mother's scent. The baby also reacts subconsciously with her home environment, the temperature of her room, the sounds from the television, the aroma from the kitchen, the noises generated from the interactions within the whole family. All these pieces of sensations are information that will eventually find their ways into the baby's mind. The house, a confined surrounding or environment, is the primary source of her mental information.
The puppy also lives in the same house like with the baby. He is also surrounded by the same dad, mom, and kids. The puppy also hears, smells, sees, and feels everyone and everything in the house. He also reacts with the temperature inside and outside the house, the sounds from the radio and television, the aroma from the kitchen, the taste of the food, and the synergies within the family. Again, the same pieces of information, that make his environment, are also stored in his brain. Just like the baby, the dog's surrounding becomes the primary root or source of information.
From the two examples, we can deduce that our surrounding is where we get our information. The environment is the source of our information. Since both baby and puppy lives in the same environment, the information obtained by the baby will exactly be the same information gained by the puppy. The baby and the puppy will acquire such same information because they are identically surrounded with the same objects and people. While these pieces of information will develop the emotions, morals, consciousness, free will, and behavior of the child, these same pieces of information will gradually evolve, develop and hone the wholeness of the puppy as well.
Remember that what the baby sees, smells, feels, hears are what the puppy sees, smells feels, and hears as well. When love and care are provided to the baby, the same love and care are felt by the puppy. When both baby and puppy are placed in a bed next to with the owner, both species will also experience the same comfort, protection, and affection. When the baby and the puppy are put in the garage overnight, both will also experience the same coldness, loneliness, and anxieties. Whatever the situation is, both entities will identically undergo the same exact experience. It is not because one is a puppy or a baby, but it is all because they were brought up in the same exact environment. Their environment makes who they are. They are programmed by the information they get from their environment. They both receive the same exact information.
However, some might argue that the child is totally different from the puppy because the child's brain is more complex than the puppy's brain. Thus, the baby is more intelligent and can comprehend easily than the dog. But, this is another misconception. Why? Since both are still babies, they don't have any ideas of what all these objects surrounding them are. They don't know what a smile is, a father, a mother, hunger, noise, and even the difference between cold and hot. They simply react to their environment. From these reactions and repetitive interactions, they instinctively "inlearn" things mechanically. And over time, this learned instinct transforms into understanding, emotions, and intelligence eventually.
................................................
If instinct is true, what are these instincts that they had before? How did these instincts develop in the first place? Will they eat their poo and drink their pee? Will they still stay and act like babies throughout adulthood? ... How did they live when they were inside the wombs? Acquired Information? Reflexes? Mechanical? Cause and Effect? Virtual Consciousness? Doe consciousness even come from the brain? Does it even exist? Is it merely an illusion, a product of cause and effect?
................................................
How is the neural system of the dermal network wired? How do humans pee? How do humans poo? How does a toilet bowl work? Is breathing in the brain? Why does the brain need oxygen? Why do humans need to eat and drink? Is everything biological, automatic, mechanical, or sensor-actuator activated? If consciousness needs a being and a surrounding, does self-consciousness do? What is subconsciousness? Do we really need a brain to be conscious?
................................................
Excerpt: Biotronics: The Silver Species by Joey Lawsin
About the Author :
Joey Lawsin is the author behind the idea of "Associative Consciousness". He is a revisionist who wants to change the world by rewriting the textbooks with new concepts that debunk the old scientific, theological, and philosophical ideas of antiquity. He published a book in Physics, created a conscious machine known as Biotronics, and proposed the axiom on "Codexation Dilemma". The article above is an excerpt from his book "Exyzforms".
People don't realize that if they try to humanize a dog, a cat, a bird, or a bear, they are actually raising a human being in an animal suit. This might be a strong statement. But this is a fact. Humans and animals might be seen as two different species. But when they live side by side, with the same surroundings, they become actually two similar objects. When they are raised both in the same controlled environment like our homes, humans, and animals are emotionally, mentally, physically, and socially alike. How is this so?
Imagine that we are simultaneously raising two newborn beings: a puppy and a baby.
The baby lives in a house with her mother, father, and her brothers and sisters. The baby hears the sound of her mother's call, sees her mother's smile, feels her mother's touch, tastes her mother's milk, and even smells her mother's scent. The baby also reacts subconsciously with her home environment, the temperature of her room, the sounds from the television, the aroma from the kitchen, the noises generated from the interactions within the whole family. All these pieces of sensations are information that will eventually find their ways into the baby's mind. The house, a confined surrounding or environment, is the primary source of her mental information.
The puppy also lives in the same house like with the baby. He is also surrounded by the same dad, mom, and kids. The puppy also hears, smells, sees, and feels everyone and everything in the house. He also reacts with the temperature inside and outside the house, the sounds from the radio and television, the aroma from the kitchen, the taste of the food, and the synergies within the family. Again, the same pieces of information, that make his environment, are also stored in his brain. Just like the baby, the dog's surrounding becomes the primary root or source of information.
From the two examples, we can deduce that our surrounding is where we get our information. The environment is the source of our information. Since both baby and puppy lives in the same environment, the information obtained by the baby will exactly be the same information gained by the puppy. The baby and the puppy will acquire such same information because they are identically surrounded with the same objects and people. While these pieces of information will develop the emotions, morals, consciousness, free will, and behavior of the child, these same pieces of information will gradually evolve, develop and hone the wholeness of the puppy as well.
Remember that what the baby sees, smells, feels, hears are what the puppy sees, smells feels, and hears as well. When love and care are provided to the baby, the same love and care are felt by the puppy. When both baby and puppy are placed in a bed next to with the owner, both species will also experience the same comfort, protection, and affection. When the baby and the puppy are put in the garage overnight, both will also experience the same coldness, loneliness, and anxieties. Whatever the situation is, both entities will identically undergo the same exact experience. It is not because one is a puppy or a baby, but it is all because they were brought up in the same exact environment. Their environment makes who they are. They are programmed by the information they get from their environment. They both receive the same exact information.
However, some might argue that the child is totally different from the puppy because the child's brain is more complex than the puppy's brain. Thus, the baby is more intelligent and can comprehend easily than the dog. But, this is another misconception. Why? Since both are still babies, they don't have any ideas of what all these objects surrounding them are. They don't know what a smile is, a father, a mother, hunger, noise, and even the difference between cold and hot. They simply react to their environment. From these reactions and repetitive interactions, they instinctively "inlearn" things mechanically. And over time, this learned instinct transforms into understanding, emotions, and intelligence eventually.
"I label X with Y, therefore I am conscious".
"
~ Joey Lawsin
................................................
If instinct is true, what are these instincts that they had before? How did these instincts develop in the first place? Will they eat their poo and drink their pee? Will they still stay and act like babies throughout adulthood? ... How did they live when they were inside the wombs? Acquired Information? Reflexes? Mechanical? Cause and Effect? Virtual Consciousness? Doe consciousness even come from the brain? Does it even exist? Is it merely an illusion, a product of cause and effect?
................................................
How is the neural system of the dermal network wired? How do humans pee? How do humans poo? How does a toilet bowl work? Is breathing in the brain? Why does the brain need oxygen? Why do humans need to eat and drink? Is everything biological, automatic, mechanical, or sensor-actuator activated? If consciousness needs a being and a surrounding, does self-consciousness do? What is subconsciousness? Do we really need a brain to be conscious?
................................................
Excerpt: Biotronics: The Silver Species by Joey Lawsin
About the Author :
 |
Disclaimer: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited as follows: Originemology, Joey Lawsin, 1988, USA.
No comments:
Post a Comment