Epigraph:

وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ ۖ قُلِ الرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّي وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا 

And they ask you concerning the soul. Say, ‘The soul is by the command of my Lord; and of the knowledge thereof you have been given but a little.’ (Al Quran 17:85)

Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

The debate over whether materialism, or physicalism, can fully account for human consciousness is a central issue in philosophy of mind. Materialism posits that all phenomena, including mental states, are the result of physical processes. This article examines arguments supporting and challenging the capacity of materialism to explain consciousness.

Arguments Supporting Materialism’s Explanation of Consciousness

1. Causal Closure of the Physical Realm: Materialists assert that the physical world is causally closed, meaning every physical event has a physical cause. Consequently, mental states must be physical to exert causal influence. Philosopher David Papineau argues that since physics is causally complete, conscious states must either be physical or epiphenomenal entities without causal power. Oxford Academic
2. Neuroscientific Correlations: Advances in neuroscience have identified correlations between brain activity and conscious experiences. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and other technologies reveal that specific mental states correspond with particular neural patterns, suggesting that consciousness arises from physical brain processes.
3. Evolutionary Perspective: Materialists contend that consciousness evolved through natural selection, favoring organisms with complex neural networks capable of processing information and adapting to environments. This view implies that consciousness is an emergent property of physical systems.

Arguments Challenging Materialism’s Explanation of Consciousness

1. The Hard Problem of Consciousness: Philosopher David Chalmers distinguishes between the “easy” problems of consciousness—explaining functions and behaviors—and the “hard” problem, which involves understanding subjective experience, or qualia. Critics argue that materialism addresses functional aspects but fails to explain why and how subjective experiences arise from physical processes.
2. Knowledge Argument: Frank Jackson’s thought experiment features Mary, a scientist who knows all physical facts about color vision but has never experienced color. Upon seeing color, she gains new knowledge—what it is like to see color—suggesting that physical facts alone do not capture the entirety of conscious experience. IEP
3. Explanatory Gap: Some philosophers assert that an explanatory gap exists between physical processes and subjective experiences. They argue that materialism cannot bridge this gap, as it lacks the tools to fully account for the qualitative nature of consciousness.

Conclusion

Materialism offers a framework for understanding consciousness through physical processes, supported by neuroscientific findings and evolutionary theory. However, challenges such as the hard problem of consciousness, the knowledge argument, and the explanatory gap highlight potential limitations in materialism’s explanatory power. The debate continues as scholars seek a comprehensive understanding of the mind’s nature.

I as a believer in God of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, keep challenging ontological materialism and keep writing and collecting for that purpose.

Additional reading:

Studying Consciousness: Are the Gaps in Our Understanding God-of-the-Gaps or A Profound Proof for God?

Can Every Quantum Particle be Proto-Conscious in An Atheist World View?

Different Philosophers Arguing God from Consciousness

Artificial Intelligence and Afterlife?