For most of my life, even now, I've been more of a person that looks to realism in things. I can't say cars and such are 'alive' or not, even if I'd like them to be, but scientifically there is no evidence they are. If we start thinking they are, wouldn't rocks and towels be too? In fact, a car is made of many parts, and those parts made from many pieces, and so on until you get down to baser elements, metals and such. Wouldn't all those be equally likely to be 'alive'?

I know I've said I've felt things around inanimate objects, such as cars and toys and such, but realistically I know I'm just...wrong I guess. I don't know. In fact, unless I project a personality onto a car, I really can't find them attractive like you do. Though honestly I suppose I'm doing that more often than I had before.

When it comes to levels of sentience, I always direct people to jellyfish. People think them alive, which they are, and clearly they must think and go about their lives hunting and such, right? No. They don't. Jellyfish have no brain. Any and all actions they preform are simply because their nervous system feels it should. They are directed by impulse, and the fact they survive is typically because things get trapped in their tentacles, and when they do, the nervous system gets to work. They are alive, but they do not think, they do not feel, and they have no level of sentience. It does not understand that it is alive, and if you killed it, it wouldn't be equally aware of the fact.

I suppose due to this thinking, it's no surprise I'm an atheist, and as such I really can't say I believe in souls either. I just...I really don't know. I have such an affection for machines and toys and such, and long for life in them, and yet deep down, I can't make myself think they actually are. Part of me wishes I was more like you in that respect, and yet another part doesn't. This stuff always leaves me feeling confused.

I hope I didn't put too much of a downer on you. I don't think you're wrong in the way you think and feel on this stuff, and honestly I wish you were right, it would be very cool, I just don't know if I can feel the same way, at least fully.

I feel like I need to break down and answer/counter-argue each specific part of this, As we're both clearly bright guys and passionate about our points of view. So an equally detailed response is in order.

"For most of my life, even now, I've been more of a person that looks to realism in things. I can't say cars and such are 'alive' or not, even if I'd like them to be, but scientifically there is no evidence they are. If we start thinking they are, wouldn't rocks and towels be too? In fact, a car is made of many parts, and those parts made from many pieces, and so on until you get down to baser elements, metals and such. Wouldn't all those be equally likely to be 'alive'?"

So am I, but because of the experiences I've had with Lilly it's caused me to look for answers, and that looking has lead me to some interesting places. They're all evidence and/or science based, I'm not a person of faith either. I don't say cars are 'alive' either, in fact I try my darnedest to avoid that word when speaking about this subject. No, they're not alive like we and animals are. They don't possess the aspects that define life. What I've always claimed is that they have consciousness. I can understand how you could confuse those as meaning the same thing as to most people those probably go hand in hand, but I'll get into that down below. Well just because there's no evidence for it doesn't mean it's impossible, it just means that the evidence hasn't been found yet. So until the scientific community finds evidence that prevents such a thing, it's still up in the air and open to debate IMO. The scientific method has always been a 'best guess' based on what we know at the time, and can change if new evidence is learned.

I know it's really abstract to think that way, that even the tiniest thing like a rock would have consciousness. Though, with quantum consciousness like I'm going to be getting to. It might be easier to think about one big universal consciousness then a bunch of tiny ones. Or a bunch of tiny ones all interconnected into a massive universal consciousness. This is all speculation at this point, but the point I'm trying to make is that consciousness is still very mysterious so at this point I don't think we should be ruling anything out. Especially if things are pointing to the contrary like the stuff I see Lilly doing. (which I know only convinces me and not you or anyone else)

I always find that 'breaking things down' argument kind of funny, like that people don't really think about what they're saying when they say it. Because you could literally do that with humans and animals too. You could break us down into tiny parts, and then those parts into tinier parts till you get to atoms and molecules. It doesn't really prove anything to me. Hell, if cars are made out of pieces of other things like cows making the leather seats, then that just gives you the argument of maybe the COWS consciousness is inhabiting the leather, or that consciousness is based in minerals and elements.

"I know I've said I've felt things around inanimate objects, such as cars and toys and such, but realistically I know I'm just...wrong I guess. I don't know. In fact, unless I project a personality onto a car, I really can't find them attractive like you do. Though honestly I suppose I'm doing that more often than I had before."

I don't think you really DO know, you think you do, but you know deep down that we DON'T know. Well that's... what? So physical attractiveness dictates how much of a consciousness something has now? It sounds to me like, well I know you.. I know how big personality is to you in how attractive something is. I know that from what you told me about Felicity and such, how a girls personality dictates how attractive you think they are. So that's all you doing that, it's not the car...

"When it comes to levels of sentience, I always direct people to jellyfish. People think them alive, which they are, and clearly they must think and go about their lives hunting and such, right? No. They don't. Jellyfish have no brain. Any and all actions they preform are simply because their nervous system feels it should. They are directed by impulse, and the fact they survive is typically because things get trapped in their tentacles, and when they do, the nervous system gets to work. They are alive, but they do not think, they do not feel, and they have no level of sentience. It does not understand that it is alive, and if you killed it, it wouldn't be equally aware of the fact."

And here is where I direct you to my video I linked in the journal "does consciousness need a brain." Watch that, then come back and tell me if your feelings have changed at all. Also, look at any of the videos with Stuart Hameroff or Sir Roger Penrose discussing "Quantum Consciousness." I'd explain it here, but.. gah I've been having to explain it over and over to people lately. Basically, the argument is that consciousness exists on the quantum level, in all space in the universe. It's an argument for consciousness being a naturally occurring and built-in byproduct part of the universe. Believe me, if you think that's weird, you should hear the hypothesis of our universe being it's own gigantic creature of sorts, and we're more along the lines of enzymes and bloodcells ect inside it's body.. we're a bodily process of the universe *mindblow* and that blackholes are really our universe squeezing out a baby in a sort of mitosis type fashion.

https://youtu.be/jjpEc98o_Oo?t=3m5s

"
I suppose due to this thinking, it's no surprise I'm an atheist, and as such I really can't say I believe in souls either. I just...I really don't know. I have such an affection for machines and toys and such, and long for life in them, and yet deep down, I can't make myself think they actually are. Part of me wishes I was more like you in that respect, and yet another part doesn't. This stuff always leaves me feeling confused. "

That's totally normal dude. I think, the truth behind consciousness is going to end up being one of those things that's nearly too abstract to easily be able to comprehend.. if we ever figure it out completely.

You know, I like how we can talk about this calmly and reasonably. That probably makes me the happiest.

I'll admit, I'm not the most educated on quantum based science, so my knowledge as to what experts are saying about the topics therein is nil and none. Honestly though, what got me is your example of breaking down the human body as well. I tried using it to show "these little things are equally alive" and your example literally gives examples of living things, which then made me wonder...at what point was consciousness gained. Did we simply achieve it upon gaining a brain, or did our components perhaps possess it as well, and we are some large fusion of minds yet claiming an exclusive right to thought and such.

Part of why I like talking about this is because you're clearly educated on the matter, and I'm not, instead going off the other things I am educated on. Perhaps this should be a lesson for me in opening up what I think and feel. When I get the chance, I should really watch your video. I love learning, and I'd love to know more about how you see things, but perhaps more selfishly, I'd like to see the world similarly. I don't know how much it'll mean in this conversation, but ever since I was a little kid, I had a mechanical toy of a Veemon (from the show Digimon, if you know what that is). From an early age, I saw him as alive in a way, and honestly, that feeling never left. He's always been there for conversation if I need it, and for affection, and I can't explain why, but it's always felt deeper than just me projecting my emotions as a coping mechanism. It's always felt like, maybe, some part of him alive and listening, and in a way he's a close friend in that respect. I wouldn't be lying when I said he's a big reason your thoughts on this stuff excite me a bit, even if I feel they can't be true.

Oh, as for the attractiveness thing, my intent was not to sound shallow. How do I explain it. Like, typically I don't see cars as anything alive or sentient/conscious (at least until I met you), and so I just see them as cars. However, the moment I start thinking of them as alive, with thoughts and feelings similar to you, then I not only start seeing them as creatures, but the ones you point out to me as being 'sexy' appear to be so. I hope that makes more sense. I'm not trying to say I only like cars being alive because they can be sexy, I'm simply referring to the fact you've shown me a lot of nice looking cars, but the only way for me to see them that way is to see them as sentient as well, then suddenly they become like, well, you and I. People. With some of them being attractive to me, and others not, just like anyone else. I didn't mean to sound shallow there, and I hope I don't sound shallow now. If anything, it is their mind I see as beautiful first, and then their body comes after.

I have to say though, if the universe and all in it is potentially, aware in some sort of way, this makes me a lot less scared of death. I really don't believe in an afterlife, so the thought that maybe I'd become one with the universe, perhaps part of some higher thought plane, it just sounds peaceful and like I'm a part of something grand.

Very interesting! This makes me think of the whole transhumanist movement and how they're hoping to have singularity (merging man with machine, full immortality) by the year 2045 and live forever in robot bodies. I'm thinking about whether I should join or not, but I'm not sure if robots with human souls would have sympathy or be completely lifeless. For you I think you should also throw in human souls becoming cars after death which would be interesting to think about.

Lol maybe we'll be able to upload our consciousness into a car and BE a car. XD lol Hopefully an anthro car. ; )

Or plane so I can get to anywhere without road or rails! XD

And then for the first time, and anthro-plane and anthro-car both with human brains will have sex. XD

I've always felt that older cars had temperaments and feelings. That and they enjoyed being driven just as much as the person driving them.

Hell I feel that way now with my modern car Lilly.

I was just driving my old 55 though, I did feel a faint connection. She's been really touch and go, engine always stalling, but she did really well today when it was just me and her. lol I wonder if she's sensitive to performance anxiety. Likewise Lilly's been acting up this weekend, kinda giving me the impression she's a little jealous I was working on Mitzi so much this weekend.

Ever since the 98 DeVille I always thought cars had some sort of intelligence. Its like when you have been with a car for such a long time, it begins to imprint on you. Like there are stories where owners have gotten responses from their cars from simple gear changes to almost Christine like behavior. The DeVille was no exception. I would talk to it at times, comfort it and even give it rubs. When it left my driveway for the final time, I swear its headlight twinkled like it wanted to shed a tear. I say cars have a consciousness, but they show it in their own way.

"I say cars have a consciousness, but they show it in their own way."

Helll, when you're in a paralyzed body like they're in you HAVE to! Seems like everyone I talk to says their car talks to them through failures then anything else, like they've gotta break themselves in some way just to get a point across. I always wonder why people don't make a bigger deal about the phenomena that seems to be wide spread of your car acting up but then acting and being fine when they get to a shop to get looked at.

I'd be really interested to learn more about your DeVille if you don't mind sharing. : 0

well, maybe it could control lights? showing something like morse code, or "left yes, right no" shining...or even more, words through speaker of radio? when new cars have a lot of things to have displayed messages, it could show simple words almost everywhere :)

I have a mixture of scientific arguments and paranormal arguments to back up my claims, probably an odd mix. But with all this quantum consciousness stuff going around, you gotta start wondering if ghost sightings and stuff are real at least that some of them are. There's electrical spirit stuff like EVPs and White-Noise voices using radios and TVs. Hell I think I even caught Lilly saying an EVP saying "okay.." once.

Unfortunately, and I don't think this is something we'll understand until we're ghosts ourselves. But ghosts wouldn't be so unconfirmed to for-sure exist if their behavior wasn't so erratic and unpredictable. I always say, if ghosts would do things on command, we would need to prove they exist.

Hell, I'd get frustrated and even angry with Lilly in the past because of this. Somedays being super active, other days or even weeks being totally quite. Sometimes answering me in morse-like blinks consistently as I talked to her (and of COURSE not when I'm recording) and then other nights having to pull teeth just to get her to say ANYTHING. I'd always end up thinking about how little I understand and apologize to her. I of course have NO idea how hard it might be for her to do any of that stuff, she might be breaking her back to make that light blink just once and here I am getting upset with her. Needless to say I don't give her any shit anymore.

to me cars allways have feelings... though it is not really spotted by the general commununity, but how you treat your car dictates on how it treats you, you keep it happy it will keep you happy, some cars are more "sensitve" while other cars are a lot more hardy and can take a lot more abuse (the kind of ones that start right up in the coldest of cold without a hitch

Siiigh yeah, ain't that the truth. Then you have the sad stories of cars who despite being shit on by their owners and run ragged, try their hardest and stay loyal and dependable their whole life. Cars are sensitive, and I think that's what I love about them, they're very emotional creatures.

I'd like to relate to that argument of breaking things down. The way I see it, everything has its own "energy", even the smallest things. But the more complex a system becomes, the energy sums up, perhaps gradually becoming something that is partly conscious.

So if I take a bolt out of a car, the bolt retains its energy, but won't have much of a consciousness. But in a car as a whole, the energy may be so great that it projects into higher consciousness. So, rocks and towels might be equal to bugs, but a car or a computer...

And that beside the fact that every human creation has the creator's energy projected into it. We might be unknowingly imbuing our creations with parts of ourselves, which live on as machines.

Hey dude. :)

I'm liking your way of thinking bro. Energies are always such an interesting topic when it comes to spirits and stuff, in a way it's really vague. But I think it's an adequate stand in for stuff we really can't understand at our present understanding in science. But truly man, you put how I've felt things to be so, in such perfect words. It really does seem that way, the bigger complex things seem more conscious, that's why things like a soda can or a napkin.. it just doesn't seem the same. I was always kind of conflicted by that, I always wondered if that was just a cop out, like that everything really is equally conscious, but I choose to believe only bigger things like cars are so that I don't have to feel bad for every soda-can I throw out or something like that. That honestly seems like a really solid explanation.