"No it isn't. In both cases we are talking about an assemblage of parts where the assemblage is capable of doing things the individual parts can not do."
Protons and gluons are not able to ask questions about the origin of the universe. A collection of them can.
Carbeurators and axles are not able to drive down the road. But a collection of them can."
I'm not saying that an assemblage of consituent parts can't form together and display attributes that non of them individually possess. I don't think that that statement lends any evidence to your argument that "The universe is aware" and I don't have any issue against it. Howerver, I am attaking the premise that: If a part posesses a property (Me posessing awareness) then the whole posesses the property as well (The universe is aware).
In my example using the blocks, I hopefully showed that using your reasoning only amounts to a confusing way of talking about things. Let me review that argument briefly.
Build a tower out of muli-colored blocks. One block is grean, one red etc. By your reasoning I should say the tower is green. But the tower is not green it is multi-colored. So saying the tower is green, really means that the tower has a green block in it.
Now examine the website logo.
By your reasoning The logo is orange. But it really only has parts of it which are orange. Of course by your reasoning as well the logo is green. So I can say two seemingly contradictory statements about the logo, and according to your reasoning they are both true. I think it is less confusing and more accurate to say the logo contains orange and green.
The same applies to the universe as well. By your reasoning the universe is aware because it contains with in it things that are aware. Now I can also say the universe contains things that are not aware therefore the universe is not aware. So there we have again two contradictory statements that are according to you both true. I say that's confusing, and that it is clearer to say the universe contains within it things that are aware, and things that are not aware.
Now the point of all this is to show that your statement that the "the universe is aware" is not a fact, but a logical argument subject to philosophical scrutiny. I find that under that scrutiny your argument doesn't hold up. I reject your premise because it a)Leads to contradictory statements and b)makes communication less clear instead of more clear.
What specific issues with this argument do you disagree with?
At this point I'll concede that I am a part of the universe becasue I don't think that I need to to argue against it at this point.
