A Brief Essay on Two Inconclusive Theories of Consciousness
The nature of consciousness remains one of the most profound and unresolved questions in human inquiry. Two dominant yet inconclusive theories sit on the table—both offering radically different visions of reality.
The first is the materialist or mechanistic view, the prevailing belief among most scientists. This theory posits that space and time give rise to matter; matter gives rise to life; and life eventually gives rise to consciousness. It is a bottom-up view of existence, where consciousness is seen as an emergent property of complex material systems like the brain. According to this model, without the physical substrate—neurons, synapses, and biochemical interactions—there is no awareness. For instance, artificial neural networks that mimic cognitive processes, or studies showing how brain damage can alter personality and self-awareness, are often cited as evidence that consciousness arises from matter. This view is endorsed, either explicitly or implicitly, by about 99% of physicists, whose work relies on a universe governed by measurable forces and laws.
In stark contrast is the second theory, espoused by figures like Donald Hoffman, a neuroscientist from the University of California, Irvine. In this consciousness-first perspective, consciousness is not a byproduct of matter—it is the foundational reality itself. Everything else—space, time, matter, even the brain—are appearances or symbolic representations created within consciousness. Hoffman suggests that what we perceive as the physical world is more like a user interface, a dashboard constructed by consciousness to interact with a deeper, unknowable reality. There are no neurons in any real, objective sense—just patterns and experiences generated by consciousness. A relatable example is the dream state: within a dream, the dreamer may see people, places, and events, all of which feel real, yet none of them exist outside of the conscious mind experiencing them.
Both theories attempt to explain the same mystery: Why do we experience anything at all? Yet neither can conclusively answer it. The materialist view cannot fully explain how subjective awareness emerges from lifeless matter, and the consciousness-first theory, while metaphysically intriguing, struggles to ground itself in empirical science.
We live suspended between these two paradigms—matter birthing mind, or mind dreaming matter—waiting for a bridge that may never come.