(A Comparative Study on the Nature of Self-Consciousness)
Reza Gholami, Faculty Member, Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies
Introduction
The question of the “conscious self” or self-consciousness is a central issue in the philosophy of mind, classical philosophy, and cognitive sciences (Dennett, 1991). This study explores three fundamental questions through a comparative approach: First, is self-consciousness a product of physical interactions in the brain’s neurons, or does it originate from a non-material source? Second, how can the classical views of Muslim philosophers, particularly Mulla Sadra’s theory of the soul, be compared with contemporary phenomenological findings? Third, what possibilities exist for resolving the “hard problem” of consciousness through dialogue between different philosophical traditions? (Chalmers, 1996)
This research critically but constructively examines arguments for a non-material origin of self-consciousness. It evaluates the reasoning of Muslim philosophers, Kant, and phenomenologists, proposing new pathways to understand this issue.
Muslim Philosophical Tradition: From Intuition to Evolution
Avicenna’s View on Self-Consciousness
Avicenna, through his “floating man” thought experiment, attempted to prove the soul’s independence from the body (Avicenna, 1027/1983). He argued that even without sensory experiences, a person would still be aware of their own existence. This argument rests on three key principles: the immediacy of self-consciousness, which is undeniable and direct; the independence of this awareness from sensory input; and the need for a non-material entity to carry such awareness.
However, even if this argument holds, it faces significant challenges. The subjective experience of “being me” does not necessarily imply a separate, non-material entity. It could instead result from complex neural processes that remain active even without sensory input. Modern neuroscience shows that self-consciousness can be disrupted by specific brain injuries, contradicting claims of complete independence from the body (Damasio, 1999). Additionally, separating the conscious self from human experience in the natural world remains open to debate and criticism.
Suhrawardi’s Intuitive Knowledge and Its Challenges
Suhrawardi distinguished between conceptual knowledge (obtained indirectly) and intuitive knowledge (direct and immediate), describing self-consciousness as a form of intuitive awareness (Suhrawardi, 1186/1999). In his view, the soul knows itself directly without needing concepts or forms. This theory explains the immediacy and certainty of self-consciousness, eliminates the need for infinite regress in self-knowledge, and accounts for the intrinsic quality of conscious experience.
However, Suhrawardi’s theory struggles to explain how this “intuitive presence” operates without referencing neural structures. Furthermore, the absolute distinction between conceptual and intuitive knowledge is questionable in light of modern findings about the networked structure of cognition (Varela et al., 1991). Like Avicenna, Suhrawardi’s view also faces criticism for isolating the experience of the conscious self from its formation process.
Mulla Sadra’s Substantial Motion: An Advanced but Incomplete Theory
Mulla Sadra introduced a revolutionary perspective with his theory of substantial motion (Mulla Sadra, 1635/1981). According to this theory, the soul starts as material and gradually evolves to higher levels of abstraction and self-consciousness. This theory includes several key ideas: the gradual evolution from plant-like to animal and human stages, the preservation of the soul’s identity despite qualitative changes, the soul’s creative existence during evolution, and its dynamic relationship with the body.
This approach explains the gradual emergence of self-consciousness, aligns with evolutionary observations, and accounts for individual differences in levels of consciousness. However, Mulla Sadra’s theory faces significant challenges. How can mere matter continuously transform into consciousness? This qualitative shift requires a more precise mechanism, which Mulla Sadra does not provide. Additionally, contrary to his claim of a linear evolution from material to non-material, neuropsychological evidence suggests that self-consciousness remains heavily dependent on brain health throughout life (Damasio, 1999). Despite these issues, Mulla Sadra’s innovative approach and its potential for dialogue in this field cannot be overlooked.
A Modern Reinterpretation of Substantial Motion
Mulla Sadra’s theory of substantial motion can be compared to modern concepts like “emergence” and “self-organization” (O’Connor, 2021). In a modern view, what Mulla Sadra calls “substantial motion” could be seen as a process where the gradual self-organization of complex systems, through interactions of simple components, produces new properties. At certain points, small changes lead to qualitative transformations, self-reinforcing processes accelerate evolution, and each stage of development opens new possibilities for the next. However, it is unclear whether imposing this modern interpretation on Mulla Sadra’s view is entirely justified.
Kant’s Transcendental Revolution
Critique of Cartesian Dualism
Kant sought to resolve the problems of Cartesian dualism with a radically different approach (Kant, 1781/1998). He argued that Descartes’ cogito mistakenly infers the existence of a thinking substance from the reality of self-consciousness. This inference is flawed because self-consciousness is merely a condition for experience, not proof of a substance. Descartes’ argument relies on an incorrect leap from concept to reality, and dualism leads to an unsolvable problem of interaction between mind and body.
The Transcendental Self as a Condition of Experience
Kant defined the “transcendental self” not as a substance but as a necessary condition for the possibility of experience (Kant, 1781/1998). This concept has specific features: it is formal and lacks experiential content, it unifies diverse experiences in consciousness, it exists as a precondition before any specific experience, and its nature can only be known to a limited extent.
This approach avoids metaphysical dualism, explains the unity of experience, and aligns with human epistemological limits. However, Kant’s theory has its own problems. While it overcomes an epistemological dead-end, it relies heavily on a presupposed framework that cannot be conceptually dissected. Kant’s view of the “self” renders it an empty form, limiting its explanatory power. How does the transcendental self connect with the empirical world? Kant pays little attention to the qualitative nature of conscious experience and fails to explain individual differences in self-consciousness.
A Modern Interpretation of the Transcendental Self
A contemporary interpretation of Kant’s “transcendental” concept might view it as a set of basic cognitive functions, shaped by long-term evolution, rooted in identifiable neural processes, and developed through individual growth (Brook, 1994).
Phenomenology and the Return to Lived Experience
Husserl’s Foundation
Husserl opened a new path to understanding self-consciousness by focusing on the concept of intentionality (Husserl, 1913/1983). His approach is built on several key principles: intentionality, meaning consciousness is always directed toward something; epoche, or suspending judgments about the natural world; phenomenological reduction, which returns to pure experience; and analyzing the structures of consciousness to explore the layers of experience.
Husserl showed that self-consciousness has a complex structure involving different levels of reflection and intentionality. He distinguished between reflective self-consciousness (thinking about oneself) and non-reflective self-consciousness (awareness without deliberate thought).
Merleau-Ponty’s Lived Body
Merleau-Ponty addressed the mind-body dualism by introducing the concept of the “lived body” (Merleau-Ponty, 1945/2012). His key contributions include: viewing the body as the essence of experience, not just a tool; embodied perception, where all perception occurs through the lived body; motor intentionality, a form of awareness embedded in movement and action; and intersubjectivity, where experience is inherently connected to others from the start.
Merleau-Ponty demonstrated that self-consciousness is neither purely mental nor purely physical but embodied. This approach offers a deeper understanding of the mind-body relationship.
Contemporary Developments in Phenomenology
Heidegger introduced a fresh perspective on self-consciousness through his concept of Dasein (Heidegger, 1927/1962). His ideas include: being-in-the-world, where self-consciousness is always situated in a context; temporality, where the structure of consciousness is fundamentally temporal; thrownness, meaning we exist in situations we didn’t choose; and being-possible, where human existence is grounded in possibilities.
Enriquez (Varela) sought to integrate phenomenology with cognitive science by: critically addressing reductionism without dismissing science; emphasizing embodied action in shaping consciousness; introducing autopoiesis, where living systems produce and maintain themselves; and proposing the extended mind, where consciousness extends beyond the skull (Varela et al., 1991).
Limitations of Phenomenology
Despite its achievements, phenomenology faces significant challenges. The hard problem of consciousness asks why and how neural information processing leads to qualitative subjective experience (Chalmers, 1996). There is an explanatory gap between phenomenological descriptions and scientific explanations. The problem of generalization questions whether insights from reflecting on experience can apply universally. Cultural relativity raises the issue of whether described structures can transcend their context and be considered universal.
Critical Analysis and Critique of Arguments
Flaws in Non-Material Arguments
Despite the sophistication of arguments from Muslim philosophers and Kant, their claims for a non-material origin of self-consciousness are open to critique. The argument from ignorance assumes that our current inability to fully explain consciousness through brain processes implies a non-material source, but history shows that previously mysterious phenomena often find natural explanations (Searle, 1992).
The lack of a clear mechanism is another flaw, as non-material theories fail to explain how a non-physical entity interacts with the physical. This explanatory gap is a serious issue. Neuroscience shows that specific brain injuries cause predictable changes in self-consciousness, challenging non-material claims (Damasio, 1999). The principle of explanatory economy favors simpler explanations, further weakening non-material arguments.
Strengths of Traditional Approaches
However, completely dismissing traditional approaches is unwise, given the relative nature of cognitive theories and their potential fallibility. Traditional philosophers deeply understood the complexity of self-consciousness, focused on the qualitative and intrinsic aspects of experience, aimed to provide a comprehensive view of consciousness’s place in existence, and recognized the psychological intricacies of humans.
Phenomenology plays a key role in bridging traditional and modern approaches. Its strengths include returning to raw experience, detailed analysis of consciousness structures, avoiding simplistic reductionism, and emphasizing the meaningful aspect of experience (Merleau-Ponty, 1945/2012). Its limitations include the lack of causal mechanisms, challenges in empirical validation, the risk of subjectivity, and difficulties in generalizing findings.
Contemporary Approaches and New Possibilities
Emergence theories suggest that consciousness arises from neural complexity (O’Connor, 2021). Weak emergence views consciousness as reducible to neural processes but appearing at a higher level of organization. Strong emergence sees consciousness as a genuinely new property arising from neural complexity. Radical emergence considers consciousness a fundamental property of nature.
Tononi’s Integrated Information Theory proposes that consciousness is the degree of integrated information in a system (Tononi, 2004). Baars’ Global Workspace Theory suggests consciousness results from information processing in a global workspace, enabling widespread access to information (Baars, 1988). The predictive processing approach views the brain as a prediction machine, constantly updating internal models of the world (Clark, 2016). In the future, connections between brains, whether through energy or computers, could exponentially increase neural-material power.
Proposed Integrated Model
Based on this analysis, an integrated model of self-consciousness should include: multi-level analysis, where consciousness is studied biologically, psychologically, and phenomenologically; evolutionary development, where consciousness emerges through evolution over time; embodiment, where consciousness is inseparable from the lived body (Merleau-Ponty, 1945/2012); structural complexity, where consciousness has an analyzable structure; and intentionality, where consciousness always has direction and content (Husserl, 1913/1983).
Mulla Sadra’s theory of substantial motion plays a central role in this model (Mulla Sadra, 1635/1981). By emphasizing the gradual evolution of consciousness and the dynamic relationship between the soul and body, it provides a framework for understanding the stages of self-consciousness emergence. In modern terms, substantial motion can be seen as a complex process where the gradual self-organization of neural systems leads to new levels of consciousness. This aligns with Heidegger’s phenomenology, which emphasizes temporality and historicity, and partially with neuroscience findings, as brain development reflects this gradual process (Damasio, 1999).
The stages of consciousness evolution, as outlined by Mulla Sadra (from plant-like to rational), can be reinterpreted in a modern model as: pre-conscious, with simple environmental reactivity; basic consciousness, with simple qualitative experiences; initial self-consciousness, distinguishing self from others; reflective self-consciousness, involving self-reflection; and advanced self-consciousness, with deep existential and meaningful awareness. Each stage, following the logic of substantial motion, enables the next.
Proposed mechanisms inspired by substantial motion include: information integration, where consciousness arises from integrated information flows (Tononi, 2004); predictive modeling, where the brain builds models of itself and the world (Clark, 2016); recursive feedback loops, enabling self-referential processes in the brain; and embodied information processing, where information is processed through lived experience (Varela et al., 1991). These mechanisms reflect the “existential creativity” Mulla Sadra described (Mulla Sadra, 1635/1981).
Implications and Practical Applications
Philosophical Implications
These include partially addressing the hard problem by offering a multi-level approach (Chalmers, 1996), bridging philosophical traditions through constructive dialogue, and revisiting classical issues like free will and personal identity with new perspectives.
Scientific Applications
These include clinical neuroscience for understanding consciousness disorders (Damasio, 1999), artificial intelligence for designing systems with consciousness-like features, and psychology for deeper insights into mental processes.
Social Implications
These involve bioethical issues, such as defining consciousness criteria for medical decisions, expanding rights based on degrees of consciousness, and understanding technology’s impact on human consciousness.
Fundamental Challenges
Theoretical Challenges
These include the problem of quality (how subjective experience arises from physical processes), the problem of unity (how diverse experiences form a unified consciousness), and the issue of freedom (how consciousness aligns with natural laws) (Searle, 1992).
Methodological Challenges
These include the problem of other minds (how to study others’ consciousness), the limits of empirical study, and the challenge of interpreting neuroscientific data.
Ethical Challenges
These involve moral responsibility for beings with varying degrees of consciousness, determining harm thresholds for conscious systems, preserving human dignity against reducing consciousness to mechanics, ensuring equitable access to consciousness-enhancing technologies, and the impact of consciousness definitions on social policies. These challenges show that understanding self-consciousness is not only a theoretical issue but has profound ethical and social implications.
Conclusion
The question of the “conscious self” remains one of the deepest philosophical issues, still evolving. Each philosophical tradition offers valuable insights, but no single approach provides a complete answer. Returning to lived experience (Husserl, 1913/1983; Merleau-Ponty, 1945/2012), incorporating scientific findings (Damasio, 1999; Tononi, 2004; Clark, 2016), and avoiding oversimplification are essential.
The proposed integrated model seeks to preserve the depth of traditional insights, align with scientific findings, enable empirical research, and offer practical applications.
- Mulla Sadra’s substantial motion, despite conceptual ambiguities, is the traditional view closest to modern understandings of consciousness emergence (Mulla Sadra, 1635/1981). Its focus on gradual consciousness evolution and the dynamic soul-body relationship aligns with developmental neuroscience (Damasio, 1999), though its mechanisms need significant revision.
- Kant’s transcendental revolution, with the “transcendental self” as a condition for experience, paved the way for functional understandings of consciousness (Kant, 1781/1998). It integrates better with cognitive science than substance-based views, but its explanatory gap remains a challenge.
- Phenomenology, by returning to lived experience and emphasizing embodiment, bridges philosophical traditions and modern science (Husserl, 1913/1983; Merleau-Ponty, 1945/2012). Merleau-Ponty’s lived body and Enriquez’s naturalized phenomenology offer paths to address the hard problem (Varela et al., 1991).
- None of the examined approaches fully resolve the issue of subjective experience quality (Chalmers, 1996), indicating the need for an interdisciplinary approach involving philosophy, cognitive science, neuroscience, and even physics.
- The ethical implications of understanding consciousness are as significant as theoretical discussions. Defining and grading consciousness directly impacts rights, medical decisions, and social policies.
- Emerging technologies like AI and brain-computer interfaces make understanding consciousness even more critical. Without a deep grasp of self-consciousness, responsible decisions about these technologies are impossible.
In conclusion, this study shows that the “conscious self” is not only a fundamental philosophical question but also key to understanding humanity’s place in the world. Answering it profoundly affects our understanding of life’s meaning, ethics, and humanity’s future. The path forward requires scientific humility, philosophical depth, and ethical responsibility to approach this profound mystery (O’Connor, 2021).
Studying self-consciousness not only helps us understand the human mind but also addresses our deepest existential questions: Who am I? How do I experience? What is my place in nature? The journey is long and complex, but the richness of philosophical traditions, the power of scientific methods, and the depth of human experience will guide us. The key is balancing scientific humility with intellectual boldness, respect for tradition with theoretical innovation, and empirical precision with philosophical depth.
Perhaps the greatest lesson of this study is that self-consciousness is not a problem to be solved once and for all but a dynamic, ongoing process that gains new understanding and reveals new dimensions with each generation.
References
Avicenna. (1983). The Metaphysics of the Healing (M. E. Marmura, Trans.). Brigham Young University Press. (Original work published ca. 1027)
Baars, B. J. (1988). A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
Brook, A. (1994). Kant and the Mind. Cambridge University Press.
Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford University Press.
Clark, A. (2016). Surfing Uncertainty: Prediction, Action, and the Embodied Mind. Oxford University Press.
Damasio, A. R. (1999). The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. Harcourt Brace.
Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness Explained. Little, Brown and Co.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Harper & Row. (Original work published 1927)
Husserl, E. (1983). Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy (F. Kersten, Trans.). Martinus Nijhoff. (Original work published 1913)
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason (P. Guyer & A. W. Wood, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1781/1787)
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of Perception (D. A. Landes, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1945)
Mulla Sadra. (1981). Al-Hikma al-muta’aliya fi’l-asfar al-‘aqliyya al-arba’a [The Transcendent Theosophy in the Four Journeys of the Intellect]. Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-’Arabi. (Original work published ca. 1635)
O’Connor, T. (2021). Emergent Properties. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021 ed.). Stanford University.
Searle, J. R. (1992). The Rediscovery of the Mind. MIT Press.
Suhrawardi. (1999). The Philosophy of Illumination (J. Walbridge & H. Ziai, Trans.). Brigham Young University Press. (Original work published ca. 1186)
Tononi, G. (2004). An information integration theory of consciousness. BMC Neuroscience, 5(1), 42.
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. MIT Press.