“an organism must have a comparatively gross structure in order to enjoy the benefit of fairly accurate laws” Erwin Schrödinger
We try to answer these questions by examining and analyzing the individual brain and body. We will not understand cognition and consciousness unless we situate the body and brain in a totalized context of biomes and species evolving in nature. Function and meaning in the largest sense can only be determined by considering context in the largest sense. We can only understand cognition to the degree that we understand nature. We can only understand consciousness to the degree that we understand nature, cognition and the social processes that enable consciousness.
Fundamental and cognitive bias
"The laws of physics and physical chemistry are inaccurate within a probable relative error of the order of 1/ √ n, where n is the number of molecules that co-operate to bring about that law –to produce its validity within such regions of space or time (or both) that matter, for some considerations or for some particular experiment. You see from this again that an organism must have a comparatively gross structure in order to enjoy the benefit of fairly accurate laws, both for its internal life and for its interplay with the external world. For otherwise the number of co-operating particles would be too small, the ‘law’ too inaccurate. The particularly exigent demand is the square root. For though a million is a reasonably large number, an accuracy of just 1 in 1,000 is not overwhelmingly good, if a thing claims the dignity of being a ‘Law of Nature’." What is Life? Erwin Schrödinger 1944
Hypothesis: Homo Sapiens, like all organisms, have an intrinsic biological bias that prevents us from accurately perceiving the totalized fundamental processes that constitute a mind evolving in nature. That bias is the expression of the biological imperative to maintain internal stability over time and it functions to help us survive and reproduce, nothing more.
It is in our fundamental nature to think that the laws of nature are constant and that we are autonomous beings. We find it difficult to understand consciousness because it is a socially emergent adaptation to a complex and fundamentally uncertain quantum reality that we cannot consciously experience in it's totality.
Adaptive narratives of trusted predictions become instantiated in implicit memory and embodied in the manufacture and use of tools so parallel processing of predicted conditions is unconscious and embodied within technology. That frees up cognitive resources to adapt to random processes by constructing physical and social predictions in the form of a self narrative within the virtual reality of memory. The virtual self is in a constant predictive and corrective cycle with sensomotor inferential process and that initiates the chain of learning that eventually instantiates regularities in technology and reduces entropy within the species.
What are the molecular mechanics of the organic reduction of entropy? If homeostasis is the distributed organizing principle of organic bodies and entropy is reduced in an environment of increasing entropy by a process that can be modeled by Bayesian statistical inference then how is Bayesian information communicated and homeostasis coordinated across the whole body? If the properties of quantum fields are the causal locus of non-organic macro-states do organic macro-states create their own emergent causal locus? Is time just our subjective experience of the second law of thermodynamics, the non-equilibrium probabilistic evolution of free energy to a generally higher entropy state from the perspective of a relatively low entropy open system in contravention of that evolution?
3. How do I test the hypothesis that emotion and the subjective experience of self is caused by the physiological process of maintaining homeostasis over time? If there is a measurable statistical artifact of homeostatic process can that be consistently correlated with specific physiological responses and subjective reports?