> > If consciousness can be effected through complex reactions of matter, all matter must be at least infinitesimally self-aware.
>
> I don't follow the logic of this step. It seems a bit like saying that since a pool of water is wet, each of the molecules must have a bit of wetness. This is similar to the fallacy of composition, by which one assumes that if a property is held by the constituents of an object, then it must also be held by the object itself. Maybe this could be called the "fallacy of decomposition," since you're saying that a property held by an object must be held at least partly by each of its pieces.
>
> -- gremlinn

I don't follow the example. Could you explain it in more detail? Each molecule of water does possess the qualities which we interpret, en masse, as wetness/liquidity.