There's a sorta-fringe theory of consciousness called Orchestrated Objective Reduction, which hypothesizes consciousness as residing at the quantum level, and functioning via microtubule structures in the brain working as miniature quantum isolation chambers.

I think it's pretty out to lunch, but I imagine any proven model/theory of consciousness working at the same level as quantum mechanics, insofar as it can be proven via experiment but isn't something our brains are capable of grasping outside of doing the math.

mushrooms told me we're all the one consciousness bubbling up from the same soup of unconsciousness. Alienation does a number on this though and maybe I just like tripping occasionally.

We're all conscious even the trees, maaan

My opinion of consciousness is it's no good

Matter used to literally just vibe, now it's got anxiety and depression? Big downgrade imo

it's bad

I'm glad you've been able to think about the problem, it's wonderful to try and work something out yourself. Really flexes the brain.

I urge you to read this paper by Peter Godfrey-Smith, a notable contemporary philosopher in philosophy of science.

I'd be very curious to see if your thoughts remain the same.

Thought is a necessary attribute of matter

https://stasisjournal.net/index.php/journal/article/view/19

Oh boy you'd love Matt Christman's Cushvlogs if you don't watch them already

Why do we behave as if we're conscious, talk about our conscious experience, and consider it to be an important concept?

Our minds are to a large extent predictive machines, they try to form a model of what we will experience next, which means forming a model of the world, which means forming a model of ourselves. Not just our minds though, the smaller components of our minds tend to do the same thing, they form a model of the landscape in which they operate, trying to predict what other parts they connect to will do next and how they themselves will respond, and components of those components, all the way down to individual neural circuits. At each level we have a degree of self-referentiality built in, as well as references to both lower and higher level systems.

Why should such a system be built like that at smaller levels of description? One reason is that it's useful, related modules may benefit from having the capabilities of their counterparts. If you're a doctor it might make sense to know a thing or two about physics, to absorb some of the intuition of a physicist at least, or in other words to have a shitty but cheap model of how a full time physicist might approach a problem. It might also make sense to have models of the institution employing you, and certainly it makes sense to understand yourself and the parts of your body so you can better understand your patients.

The other is that it aids in learning by way of providing constant feedback. A cortical column is rather alienated from the life experience of its doctor host, it will be very difficult for a brain to route feedback for how its behavior affected long term patient care back to such a tiny part so that part can learn to be a better aide, easier but still difficult to route feedback for predicted patient outcome, as it's closer in time, but if part of its job is to predict itself, its direct neighbors, and the larger circuit it belongs to, getting feedback is going to be a lot easier, it comes immediately and in high fidelity. This all pervading self referentiality and self contextualization is a basic fact of our architecture, since we require to model ourselves at a high level it is not surprising that it forms an important concept for us, which we have given the name consciousness.

Yeah but why does it actually feel like something to be alive, like from the inside, like I actually have qualia I swear. Also, why should my experience be broken into discreet moments, why do they flow from one to the next in order, why does this moment I'm experiencing now specifically seem to be privileged above the future and past ones?

No idea.

I don't believe in it. I think it's some kind of spooky attribution error.

I think my consciousness is real and not a byproduct of what we currently understand as biology. I think there's an essence to living creatures that makes their existence and experience real.

I think even if I'm only a brain in a jar somewhere, that the things around me exist and harming them harms me too.

I think consciousness lives on after death. It may be absent for a period of indeterminate time, but I don't think it's ever truly gone.

I don't know the how of any of this except for my own consciousness though. I cannot see my consciousness permanently ending. I don't know if that's good or bad yet, but if I have an infinite amount of time to think on it, maybe I'll know eventually.

I don't think it's selfish to say that I don't know if other consciousnesses will live on, but I can only speak to my own inability to understand nonexistence. Who knows? Maybe it'll click for me and the consciousness I call me will disappear.

I can't say with any proof that any other life I encounter is even real, let alone conscious, but I have no reason to believe anyone is less real or conscious, or deserving of compassion. It's not even my place to judge.

I hate the thought terminating cliches that come with simulation theories, but I appreciate how quickly it exposes someone.

If I found out I wasn't truly conscious, that I was artificial or incomplete in some way, I could still find ways to be happy enough.

All this to say, the only conscious experience I have is my own, and whether it's from neurons running a complex programming code, a soul, or the fragment of some larger entity, the person writing this is conscious enough to say they're conscious.

I believe in the soul as a metaphysical/spiritual object and producer of consciousness. Which is probably one of the least unique views lol.

Consciousness is all about the midichlorians