News and Events

I address how sentience might arise using a comparative analysis of the nondual philosophy of the 11th century Hindu philosopher Abhinavagupta in relation to a contemporary, currently popular neuroscientific theory addressing the relation between the mind and the body, Integrated Information Theory (IIT 3.0). How it is that some things and entities are classified as sentient, while others are not? While much of Indian philosophy engages with the concept of consciousness, often writ in large and abstract terms, as cit or samvit, I suggest that Abhinavagupta’s articulation of consciousness as vimarśa may be better suited as a concept for determining the status of sentience. This analysis of Abhinavagupta’s panentheism, particularly with the concept of vimarśa, brings to the forefront a crucial and often somewhat overlooked premise underlying IIT 3.0’s ontological framework: the implicit and requisite assumption of subjectivity within materiality.

Abstract:

Many say that we are suffering from a crisis of a lack of trust in science in this country. In response, significant effort has been lavished on improving science communication—with the aim of promoting such trust. But it’s not always clear what “trust of science” ought to mean. Does “science” really deserve “our” trust? Why? Without compelling answers to these questions, we are rudderless when it comes to improving the relationship between science and the public. I will attempt to steer us in a better direction.

Please attend, and please encourage your colleagues, students, and friends to attend.