Panprotopsychism is a philosophical view about the nature of consciousness.
It is a middle position between:
- Physicalism (only physical matter exists)
- Panpsychism (everything has some form of consciousness)
🧠 Core Idea
Panprotopsychism says:
The fundamental building blocks of reality are not conscious,
but they have proto-conscious properties that can give rise to consciousness when arranged in the right way.
So:
- Electrons are not conscious
- Atoms are not conscious
- But the basic stuff of the universe contains properties that can combine to produce conscious experience
🔍 Why Propose It?
It’s mainly motivated by the Hard Problem of Consciousness, introduced by David Chalmers:
How does subjective experience arise from physical matter?
Panprotopsychism tries to avoid two extremes:
|
View |
Problem |
|
Physicalism |
Hard to explain how experience arises from purely non-experiential matter |
|
Panpsychism |
Seems strange to say electrons are conscious |
Panprotopsychism says:
- Fundamental reality has the potential for experience
- But only complex systems (like brains) actually become conscious
🧩 Difference from Panpsychism
|
Panpsychism |
Panprotopsychism |
|
Basic entities are conscious |
Basic entities are not conscious |
|
Consciousness is everywhere |
Only proto-properties are everywhere |
|
Combination problem: how do tiny experiences combine? |
Avoids combination of tiny experiences |
📚 Related Philosophers
- David Chalmers (sympathetic to versions of it)
- Bertrand Russell (inspired Russellian monism, often linked)
- Galen Strawson (defends panpsychism rather than panprotopsychism)
🧠 In Simple Terms
Think of it like this:
- Hydrogen and oxygen aren’t wet.
- But when combined correctly, they produce water — which is wet.
Similarly:
- Fundamental particles aren’t conscious.
- But arranged in brains, proto-properties produce experience.
If you’d like, I can also explain:
- How it connects to quantum mechanics
- Russellian monism
- Objections to it
- Whether it solves the Hard Problem
- How it compares to idealism
What direction are you interested in?
No comments:
Post a Comment