The Essence of Inner Life: Living vs. Non-Living Matter
In the natural world there exists a remarkable division: a living organism is imbued with an inner life energy, expressed through a holistic subjective experience, while non-living matter remains merely a stage for the laws of physics and chemistry. In the living, it is not simply a cumulative collection of elements but rather a deep interconnection of sensations, intentionality, and creative activity that creates a unique sensory unity. This is not an accidental distribution of atoms, but the result of internal processes that foster self-expression and the awareness of one’s own reality.Non-living matter, being lifeless, emphasizes its properties through objective regularities devoid of the inner organization capable of leading to the emergence of consciousness. Its behavior is explained by randomness and strict adherence to universal laws, offering no possibility for self-regulation or creative control. Such fundamental differences between the living and the non-living inevitably prompt reflection on the profound essence of existence.In conclusion, one can note that the subjective experience typical of living systems is the result of a complex, internally self-organizing process that distinguishes them from lifeless forms of matter. Understanding these differences not only deepens our perception of the world around us but also inspires the search for new dimensions of existence and creative self-expression.
What is the Difference between the Subjective Experience of Living Matter and Non-Living Matter, and Why Does Non-Living Matter Not Generate Experience?Living matter is distinguished by the presence of a holistic, organic subjective experience, which is not merely the sum of separate chemical or physical phenomena. What we call subjective experience does not arise by accident as a result of random combinations of atoms; rather, it is an expression of an inner life activity that unites sensations, intentionality, and the capacity for self-expression. In contrast, although non-living matter demonstrates certain regularities and abides by the laws of nature, it possesses neither an internal sensory unity nor a governing, creative mechanism that could give rise to subjective consciousness.This difference is particularly evident in the fact that the properties of non-living matter are essentially the result of random processes and do not contain the inner organization characteristic of living systems. As noted in one source: "From the materiality of the world it is impossible to understand even why matter in its various processes is strictly subject to laws? … It is especially difficult to comprehend, on the basis of materialism, the emergence of psychic existence. Only ignorance can uphold materialism in our time." (source: link txt, page: 123)Furthermore, the properties of matter have generally not led to the emergence of any controlling, creative mechanism that might ensure the advent of consciousness: "In other words: the properties of matter have never yet led to the emergence of a controlling, creative mechanism." (source: link txt, page: 236)Thus, subjective experience is the result of the profound internal organization of the living, which includes wholeness, directionality, and the immediate perception of its own reality. Non-living matter lacks these properties, as its forms and regularities are determined solely by external, objective processes that are incapable of self-organization in the sense required for the emergence of true experience.Supporting citation(s): "From the materiality of the world it is impossible to understand even why matter in its various processes is strictly subject to laws? … It is especially difficult to comprehend, on the basis of materialism, the emergence of psychic existence. Only ignorance can uphold materialism in our time." (source: link txt, page: 123)"In other words: the properties of matter have never yet led to the emergence of a controlling, creative mechanism." (source: link txt, page: 236)