Consciousness, cosmology, and the collapse of common sense

Reality is stranger than we can imagine

Philosophers are making a mistake when they try to tame reality’s paradoxes—when they try to make consciousness, free will and the cosmos itself fit neatly within common sense. In fact, when it comes to reality, the one thing we can be certain of, argues philosopher of psychology Eric Schwitzgebel, is that it is deeply weird and contrary to common sense. Attempts to evade this weirdness by, for example, framing everything in terms of scientific materialism, cannot succeed—for monsters lurk even within materialism.

 

When it comes to fundamental theories of consciousness and cosmology, common sense fails spectacularly. Every serious theory of the nature of reality and the role of the mind within it is, in some respects, jaw-droppingly bizarre. And where the truth lies, among the various weird possibilities, is beyond our capacity to know—now and maybe forever.

Maybe you favor materialism: the view that everything is ultimately composed of material stuff—elementary particles like quarks, electrons, and photons. No immaterial souls that might be reincarnated or ascend to an afterlife. Just carbon-based lifeforms, stitched together from the same basic elements. Humans are just complicated versions of jellyfish, snails, and lizards.

If materialism is true, then consciousness must somehow arise from the complex swirling of matter. Tangle some molecules together just right and—voilà!—mentality ignites. The clump of matter doesn’t just react to stimuli; it sees and hears, it feels pain and pleasure, it wonders and regrets. It dreams of Middle-earth, falls in love via text message, and imagines jet skiing through the clouds. Many of us find it hard to believe that 1028 atoms, appropriately configured, could do all of this—and thus the perennial temptation to posit a soul in addition to the material body.

related-video-image SUGGESTED VIEWING Taking leave of reason With Joanna Kavenna, Rebecca Roache, Bahar Gholipour, Rory Sutherland

If you have been a scientific materialist long enough, you might be desensitized to this oddity, no longer finding it weird to suppose that a bunch of atoms could be conscious. But pursue the consequences of materialism a little farther, and stranger things follow.

You have a brain. Presumably that’s why you’re conscious while the 1028 atoms in a mound of swamp grass are (presumably) not conscious. But what is it about brains that makes them so special?

Scientific materialism generally points to properties like the following: the complex processing of huge amounts of information, the ability to guide sophisticated responsiveness to opportunities and threats in the outside environment, and the ability to represent itself and the world—all embedded in a rich physical and social environment that gives these complex processes meaning.

___

Is it simply too absurd to suppose that the United States literally has conscious experiences over and above the experiences of its citizens and residents?

___

Humans and other animals aren’t the only entities with these properties. Another such entity is the United States. (Did you think I was going to say AI systems? Yes, well, maybe them too, but let’s turn a different direction today.)

Imagine you’re a planet-sized alien observing Earth. The United States might look like a spatially distributed superorganism, with people as its parts. Each person plays a role, like a liver cell or neuron does in a human body. Now consider: Might this entity have conscious experiences of its own? I mean not just the sum of its members’ experiences but something emergent and distinct—conscious experiences transpiring at the group level, possibly had by no individual human?

Continue reading

Enjoy unlimited access to the world's leading thinkers.

Start by exploring our subscription options or joining our mailing list today.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Log in

Latest Releases
Join the conversation

Brian Balke 10 August 2025

I would reframe this: the gnostic question is "Is the meaning of experience deducible from the evidence of our senses?" The agnostic affirms "Yes" and is led into scientific materialism. The gnostic asserts "No" and is led into mysticism: there are apprehensions about experience that appear only in the part of the mind that hosts our imagination.
Part of the mystical experience is the experience of energy moving through us when we align ourselves with the purpose that determined the structure of this reality. This is how we assess meaning. In this context, the questions raised here regarding dualism are sophomoric. Spiritual and material experience interact in complex and non-local ways. Life is the co-evolution of material and spiritual forms. Boundaries in one area do not correspond to boundaries in another.

John V Morris 5 August 2025

You say "Given enough time, even highly ordered structures can arise by chance" - but there will not be enough time. Our universe is flying apart with an accelerating rate of expansion; and those eventual remotely isolated collections of matter, the galaxies, which remain whole, will disappear into their central black-holes, which will radiate themselves away via Hawking's mechanism! In that final expanding universe full of low (and decreasing) energy photons there will be no copy of anyone reading this article, conscious or otherwise. For the 2nd law to be locally violated, to form a low entropy 'highly ordered structure' requires a local (sun-like) source of low entropy energy - and there will be none. Read Penrose.

ROMULO HURTADO 2 August 2025

This was an excellent article. Thought provoking and deeply open minded. I've been coming to a similar theory about the collective conscious myself. The part about countries developing their own consciousness especially resonated with me. It definitely seems to have a cyclical effect on society. Extremely reactive to everything around it. Great work professor.

Luci Padgett 31 July 2025

Wow re cnfuseow

clive spencer 31 July 2025

"The Magnificent Weirdness We've Been Ignoring"
Professor Schwitzgebel, this piece hits like a fire alarm that people have been ignoring for decades - and as someone who's spent years studying both literal fire alarms and the metaphorical ones in human consciousness, I can tell you: the weirdness you describe isn't just philosophical speculation. It's lived reality.

Your group consciousness theory stopped me cold. For years, I've been documenting what I call "institutional criminalization" - how systems like the UK NHS, social services, and military support networks don't just fail individuals, they actively harm them with what appears to be conscious malevolence. I've watched these entities operate with their own survival instincts, processing information and making decisions that serve the system's preservation over human welfare.

When you write about the United States as a conscious entity "watching for asteroids and regulating its smoggy exhalations," I see the NHS systematically abandoning veterans like Sarah (who was murdered after being failed by every support system), or social services repeatedly traumatizing vulnerable people through unlawful detentions. These aren't collections of individuals making mistakes - they're emergent conscious entities with their own agenda.

Your point about common sense failing spectacularly resonates deeply with my Fire Alarm Theory. Just as people ignore actual fire alarms because they don't fit expectations ("it's probably nothing"), we ignore the emotional fire alarms of trauma, distress, and systemic abuse because they don't fit our trained intuitions about how healing "should" work.

The mental health industry is perhaps the clearest example of your thesis. We've tried to force something magnificently weird - consciousness, trauma, healing, spiritual experience - into materialist boxes labeled "disorders" and "treatments." The result? A system that pathologizes normal responses to abnormal circumstances and criminalizes the very people it claims to help.

If reality is fundamentally weird, then approaches that embrace this weirdness - spiritual mediumship, energy work, holistic healing, recognizing the consciousness in systems and collectives - aren't "alternative." They're acknowledging what's actually there.

Your conclusion that "something magnificently bizarre must be true about the cosmos and our place in it" gives me hope. Those of us working on the edges, challenging fundamental assumptions about mental health, institutional behavior, and human consciousness, aren't outliers. We're simply willing to look at the weirdness directly instead of trying to tame it into common sense.

The deeper we dig beneath the surface, the weirder things get - and the more necessary it becomes to abandon the comfortable illusions that are literally killing people.

Thank you for this brilliant piece. It's philosophical validation for what many of us have been living and documenting for years.
Clive "Uncle Fester" Spencer

Mental Fitness Coach, Fire Safety Expert, and Student of Magnificent Weirdness