Some components of human cognition are voluntary and some involuntary. The visual cortex registering the border of a shape is involuntary. An internal monologue is involuntary but can be deliberately modified. Reasoning through a philosophical problem is quite voluntary but involves involuntary aspects as well. Many cognitive processes have conventionally free elements, but moreso unfree elements which subjugate our self-identified wills. — Enrique
So human will is not the sum total of all brain processes, and many involuntary features of cognition that reside beyond our wills aren't what common sense labels as thought or action. I think common sense terms are essentially being redefined, which could lead to confusion. Basically, some elaboration will be necessary for your approach to work. — Enrique
Some kind of elaboration along those lines is adequate I think. Amazing to realize neuroscience is so nascent that the textbook meanings of "thought" and "action" will be completely different in a hundred years. — Enrique
Basic gist, we've been wrong about consciousness for years. Oddly, this was already my idea of consciousness before I read it; hope you like it, share thoughts if you're up for it — Garrett Travers
I agree that the material basis of paranormal intuition is a great mystery, and I think it will be solved when physics has advanced far enough to fashion a model of matter's supradimensional structure along with how energy flows through it. Could causality proceed no faster than the speed of light and time travel by filling a supradimensional hyperspace of which thermodynamic substance is only the veneer or a fractional component? How would this change the way we conceptualize distance? What are the contents of hyperspace, how does it correlate with electromagnetism and interact with the brain? Might this space be populated by entirely spiritual objects and organisms that transcend sense-perception and our current models? What kind of instruments would enable scientists to objectively inspect this paranormal realm and perhaps ecosystem if it indeed exists? — Enrique
I've regarded consciousness as a neural function that is emitted, or generated as a result of all the functions of the brain working as a synchronized catena of systems. — Garrett Travers
Do you think mental states are identical to brain states? Or mental states are caused by physical states? — RogueAI
All states, short of illnesses of certain types, are produced by the brain. Mental states are a result of neural activity in association with chemicals that are part of the intrinsic function of the brain. — Garrett Travers
But are mental states identical to brain states? It sounds like you're saying mental states are caused by brain states. — RogueAI
The brain creates the states, ... — Garrett Travers
But the question is, what is a brain? Does a jellyfish have a brain? Does a jellyfish have mental states? Is an electronic brain a brain? Does your computer have mental states?
Nothing is explained. — SolarWind
How does the brain cause mental states? Why is consciousness only associated with some parts of the brain? Would something that's functionally equivalent to a brain also be conscious? What about a simulated brain? — RogueAI
You seem to be talking about causation where the brain causes mental states. How exactly does a physical brain produce the mental state of visual depth? When I view the world, I don't experience the neural signals and chemical interactions inside of my brain that I see when looking at other people's mental states. I experience a sensory model of the world. So any good theory needs to explain how it is that I experience my mental states so differently than I experience other people's mental states (as brains).All states, short of illnesses of certain types, are produced by the brain. Mental states are a result of neural activity in association with chemicals that are part of the intrinsic function of the brain. — Garrett Travers
Through chemical interactions across 80 billion neurons. — Garrett Travers
Consciousness is actually NOT only associated with some parts of the brain, but all of them working in unison.
If it were truley functionally equivalent in reality, yes.
You seem to be talking about causation where the brain causes mental states. How exactly does a physical brain produce the mental state of visual depth? When I view the world, I don't experience the neural signals and chemical interactions inside of my brain that I see when looking at other people's mental states. I experience a sensory model of the world. So any good theory needs to explain how it is that I experience my mental states so differently than I experience other people's mental states (as brains). — Harry Hindu
How does that work? Why do chemical interactions across 80 billion neurons produce consciousness, but chemical reactions in other organs don't? What is so special about neurons? Would a brain with 70 billion neurons produce consciousness? 7 billion? 7 thousand? — RogueAI
1. If you dont experience other people's mental states then how do you know about them? What form does your knowledge of other people's mental states take? — Harry Hindu
I am not confined to my experience of my brain. Like I said, I don't experience my brain. I experience a sensory model of the world. I experience brains when looking at other people's mental states. — Harry Hindu
How it works was told to you. Why it works, is an anthropomorphization of reality. There is no why, there is only how. Organs are themselves specialized structures not designed to produce such activity. The way those organs were specialized through genetic information exchange and adaptation, is the same process by which the brain is specialized through genetic information exchange and adaptation. The result of billions of years of chemical interactions.
As far as these questions: What is so special about neurons? Would a brain with 70 billion neurons produce consciousness? 7 billion? 7 thousand?
What's not special about neurons? What brain has only 70 billion? Do they have consciousness? These are questions for you to answer with the info you've been given, and the info broadly available to you. I'm a philosopher, in particular an ethicist, not a neuroscientist. You're asking the wrong person. — Garrett Travers
Let's focus on computers. Would a computer running a simulation of a working brain be conscious? — RogueAI
Are computers ever going to be conscious? — RogueAI
Are any computers now conscious? — RogueAI
How would you test for computer consciousness? — RogueAI
Are computers ever going to be conscious?
— RogueAI
Not anytime soon, but possibly. — Garrett Travers
So you believe computer consciousness is possible. — RogueAI
That is to say that it is possible that a collection of electronic switches is conscious. — RogueAI
No. That's not what I'm saying. Not in any conceivable manner could I possibly have been misconstrued to have said such a thing. — Garrett Travers
A computer is not a collection of electronic switches? — RogueAI
What do you mean by "computer"? — RogueAI
Transistors? — RogueAI
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.