> Some modern philosophers advocating pantheism think they just might.

This is a terribly low bar. The map of “ Some modern philosophers” “think [something] just might” [something] is an incoherent patchwork.

I think that theorizing about things without hard evidence has value. What-if’s teach us a lot, by raising important questions, and keep our ideas flexible, preparing us for the next crazy insight that nature reveals.

But that isn’t the same as attributing any reliability to the as yet unproven enthusiasms of philosophers.

There is a clear case for a survival benefit for creatures whose awareness and control extends into their own thinking. Thus a reason consciousness would be one of many strategies evolution may produce.

What natural phenomena is explained by a conscious rock hypothesis? What would cause a rock to organize in such a way? Where is this information about itself encoded and experienced in a rock? It’s not a coherent conjecture.

It is incoherent because it lacks evidence, not because the idea is absurd.

My computer is made from rocks.

Natural formation rock consciousness both lacks evidence and is absurd, as there isn’t even a coherent reason to think it might or could.

Your computer processes information, and can be configured to process information about itself. At least the possibility and potential utility exists that conscious computers may one day exist.

Humans are a natural formatiom. The laws of science are our only real limit here so let's be honest about this.

That is a breathtakingly pedantic reading of what I said.

I used “natural” to distinguish minerals created via geologic processes, from minerals and elements intentionally processed into machines.

Similarly, evolution’s long process of accumulated innovations separate humans from our constituent elements as found in the geologic environment.

Both technological and evolutionary iterative and self-reinforcing adaptations provide a mechanism for complex coordinated high level information flows to arise aimed at survival (biological or economic) where consciousness has both a potential purpose and a plausible process for coming into being.

A lump of granite or obsidian presents no evidence of consciousness, no purpose for consciousness, and no plausible process for having accreted or transformed into something with consciousness.

The conjecture that such rocks may be conscious stands on equal footing to the conjecture that they are unicorns wearing magical rock-disguise cloaks.

> The conjecture that such rocks may be conscious stands on equal footing to the conjecture that they are unicorns wearing magical rock-disguise cloaks.

Hah! I would love to prove you wrong by imagining the perfect geological formation (many rocks as humans have many complex organs) that can receive and transmit coherent, dense information,

but I am a mere mortal.

For all practical purposes you're right, and for all philosophical purposes The Thinking Rock is an extreme example.

Let's revisit this thread in 5000 years after humans have gone interstellar and see if we can't review some evidence of unconventional life forms.

> Let's revisit this thread in 5000 years after humans have gone interstellar and see if we can't review some evidence of unconventional life forms.

That would be wonderful!

I have no doubt that different chemical foundations, and different environments will yield extreme differences in morphology.

The uncountable differences between humans and the octopus are a vivid example of how little aliens may resemble us.

It would be most interesting to know if life could evolve in oceans under planetary crusts, sunless rogue planets warmed by radioactive decay, in the extreme conditions around magnetars where chemistry takes on different rules, in thick rings or atmospheres around gas giants, or in methane or other non-water “oceans”.

Surely somewhere there are energy conserving hibernating “rocks” that we might be well surprised to discover are sentient!