Well, in that case, cancer is a bad thought-form that proliferates at the cost of the total consciousness.
Placing the seat of consciousness in material building blocks overcomes the rather bothersome problem of defining a threshold at which consciousness arises. If we assume it
is, then we need not identify the point at which it
becomes. It always
was, and the failure is one of recognition (measurement) rather than a problem of not knowing when something emerges from a bunch of un-something.
I rather like doing away with the 'abiogenesis' version of emergent consciousness.
Since DNA is a very particular arrangement of matter, we could say that each unique DNA code is the form of a unique consciousness, (yet one with others in a common 'super-consciousness' - the zeitgeist of passing ages), and that this code itself is the creature that parasitises matter in order to manifest. Physical manifestation permits permutations of consciousness to arise in offspring, thus flexibility of the data system in regards to change. Consciousness adapts, creates transformational waves that drive the need for adaption, adapts again.
Then we sit around as we get old (passing on our influence in continued cultural domination - hello bloody baby-boomers - which lucky generation will be wiping your asses!?) and tell the little ones we never had computers in our day
r4ch3l said it best.
Regarding symbiosis and parasitism - I wondered about that. By definition a parasite is of no benefit to its host. There would have to be some benefit for the flesh itself (matter) in being co-opted by DNA, for symbiosis to apply. Something analogous to two beings, in exchange. Are we better off as rocks? As humic acids? As vapour? What do we experience as matter that is improved by the arrangement into DNA and the products of DNA?
Matter is given an equal but subject relationship with spirit (information) - rendering life a symbiosis of the two. Yet information shapes unliving things too... or maybe they are not so unliving. Or unconscious.
