The observation needn't be a "conscious being" nor "a recording viewed by a conscious being" but a measurement/detection device.
"If Bohr and Heisenberg had spoken of measurements made by
inanimate instruments rather than "observers," perhaps this strained relationship between quantum and mind would not have been drawn. For,
nothing in quantum mechanics requires human involvement. " (from the first link below)
Some alternative (scientific mainstream) views:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-myth-of-quantum-consc_b_788798
The first article you posted is a criticism primarily of Robert Lanza's views about consciousness (and other related views which are different than what I'm proposing). Lanza's definitions, and focus on "human brains and biology" is where his views fail, imo. If consciousness is viewed as a fundamental, intrinsic property of all matter, then statements like "the observer effect doesn't require a conscious observer" are not valid, since every bit of matter from a single elementary particle up to complex life participates in the "realm of consciousness" (though at different intensities -- different levels of control over 3D matter, different levels of sensory information of the 3D environment, and different awareness of the dimensions of space, time, and potentially the multiverse) I'll think about a better definition for "conscious observer" in this context... I do agree that humans are not required.
We are so tied to a definition of consciousness as being a "human thing" or "brain thing", that most criticisms against a Consciocentric view form a paradox that is invalid based on misconception of the definition... If consciousness is fundamental and intrinsic to all matter, then the biggest problem, or criticism with it, is the "
combination problem", which basically says: How does consciousness of elementary particles, to elements, to molecules, to proteins, to cells, to organs, to complex life combine together to create what we think of as "ourselves". That is an interesting topic - I would say that we have been conditioned to think in rigid terms that we're these singular, discreet conscious beings with a hard boundary of consciousness that originates only in the brain. Under Consciocentrism, our "personal consciousness" is actually many spheres of consciousness related to our organs, muscle groups, and other specialized bodily functions.
Consciousness is a fluid thing, where we can focus on high level tasks like contemplating the past, the future and various choices of freewill for the whole system of our body, or we can focus in on specific regions of consciousness / organ groups in our bodily systems. ie:
When we learn to play guitar, our consciousness is tightly focused on a window of time around "the now / near future" and controlling the muscle groups in the hands and arms. We directly control the muscles of our hands and teach them -
literally giving our hands "muscle memory" as we learn. As we become adept guitarists, the localized "spheres of consciousness" associated with the muscle groups in our hands and arms can perform this amazing task of timed coordination, playing music, with minimal to no higher level conscious focus. We can tune out, or think about high level concepts like transitions of song parts, key signature changes, or emotions, and our hands, with their "conscious muscle memory" execute all the complex motions like subroutines of a program. We have many spheres of consciousness in our bodies that we can focus in on, or we can leave them operating as part of the whole. Our bodies are a sort of
ecosystem of consciousness, working together to allow advanced interaction with and control over our 3D material environment.
Consciousness, in this paradigm is directly present throughout our bodies, and not centralized in the brain. The brain is a high level transceiver that allows the body to control chemical production, and send matter, hormones and chemical energy to different areas of the body. The brain is a major organ of consciousness, and the central receiving unit for most of our senses, but not the only organ that is directly accessible by consciousness.
Further, the Consciocentric paradigm would state that as we pick up the guitar and obtain control over its 3D matter, our consciousness actually extends over the guitar itself. The phrase "it becomes an extension of the body" is literally true. Everything we own is part of our sphere of consciousness. As we manipulate matter, our conscious control literally extends to the object. And when we interact with other people, we participate in a sort of shared consciousness with them.
------------
I think there may be a way that we could scientifically test this hypothesis of consciousness directly existing in muscle groups, by monitoring, via MRI or other tools if there is a difference in patterns in brain activity when learning to play guitar, through becoming journeymen, through becoming a master of the instrument. If its true, then the patterns in the brain would change significantly at different skill levels, even if playing the exact same riff or song... as we progress to a master level, and "muscle memory" takes over the process, our brains should exhibit a completely different (and less intense) pattern of neuron firing - despite the fact that the exact same motions and coordination would be required. The localized consciousness of our hand and arm muscles would be conducting all the complex motions and timing required to play a riff or song. Also, I'm not sure if a technology exists, but if there's some way to monitor the muscle groups of the hands via some sort of detailed MRI like instrument, we should be able to monitor the millions of neurons in our hands and arms, and test the hypothesis.
