4 ms·

It's not like this viewpoint isn't known, it's just not accepted because it makes no sense. Consciousness really is unexplainable by what we know of the physica

It's not like this viewpoint isn't known, it's just not accepted because it makes no sense. Consciousness really is unexplainable by what we know of the physical world, it's constancy is just odd. When were talking about the most advanced organ in the history of the universe, is it really a leap to consider that new physics would be involved?

abiox 10y ago
"Consciousness really is unexplainable by what we know of the physical world" maybe. or perhaps it simply has a mystical privilege. there do seem to be a fair number of terms and concepts (like 'qualia') that hold sway over some people's discussion, but themselves seem questionable.
- visarga 10y ago
  Qualia and the hard problem are just dualism disguised. Dualism is rife with contradictions and has been largely abandoned, but now it's trying to gain acceptance again under new names. The idea that there is something special about internal states of brains, that can't be explained away, puts mental states on a special place, apart from everything else - a dualism.
visarga 10y ago
> Consciousness really is unexplainable by what we know of the physical world, it's constancy is just odd. Consciousness is just you adapting to the world. You need consciousness in order to live in the world, with all its complexity and dangers. The brain has nothing magical about it, it is made of the same kind of atoms as anything else. What is happening is just perception, judgement and action in a loop, each supported by neural networks. Every moment, a full perception-judgement-action loop plays itself. It generates a stream of experience and emotion (which is just the value or reward intuited in certain situations and actions). This internal stream of perceptions and judgements is consciousness.
- hacker_9 10y ago
  Amazing that every sentence you wrote is objectively wrong. I'm bored so lets go through them: 1. Consciousness is just you adapting to the world Since when did adaptation require consciousness? We're not even sure most animals are conscious, but they adapt to their conditions just fine. 2. You need consciousness in order to live in the world, with all its complexity and dangers. Where does this need come from? A self driving car could navigate the world without being conscious at all. 3. The brain has nothing magical about it, it is made of the same kind of atoms as anything else. Didn't say it was magical, but saying it's made of atoms moves this conversation along by zero percent. It's like saying computers are just a bunch of transistors, disregarding the millions of lines of code required for it to even just take my key inputs as I type out this pointless comment, and turn them into glyphs on the screen. 4. What is happening is just perception, judgement and action in a loop, each supported by neural networks. Where has this come from? We don't even know what goes on inside one neuron, let alone the billions of networks. 5. Every moment, a full perception-judgement-action loop plays itself. So what happens if I close my eyes and cover my ears? Now I am unable to perceive the world around me, and break the 'loop'. It's not like I shut down. I don't think you've thought this through. 6. It generates a stream of experience and emotion (which is just the value or reward intuited in certain situations and actions). Yes certain chemicals are released in the brain depending on your actions, but of course it's all chemicals; it's a biological system. 7. This internal stream of perceptions and judgements is consciousness. No, this is just a function of part of the brain, which we can be aware of through consciousness. All in all, there is completely no depth to your explanation at all. The fact we haven't got a definite blueprint for the brain, does really mean it is currently beyond our understanding. Neuroscientists have died of old age trying to figure out the secrets of the brain, and it's because they were looking a bit more in-depth that it's just a bunch of atoms.
  - lend000 10y ago
    > Amazing that every sentence you wrote is objectively wrong. As I mentioned in my original post, most people, like yourself, will reject these very non-intuitive conclusions, probably indefinitely. Regardless, I'll point out that many of your counter-arguments to the parent comment are wrong (not saying I agree with all of his description, either). > A self driving car could navigate the world without being conscious at all. How do you define conscious? 'Feeling' just like you do? I think many modern AI's could be said to experience a different, simple form of consciousness as they process inputs. Granted, it's not useful unless you have an AI that is also more generally self-aware and communicates with us. But regardless, your hyperbolic example equated driving a car on streets with "living in the world," which you were replying to (which is an objectively ridiculous comparison). > We don't even know what goes on inside one neuron, let alone the billions of networks. Considering what NN-based deep learning has accomplished with relatively small numbers of simulated neurons with relatively simple models, I think it's safe to say that a single neuron is not as complex and mysterious as you may think. > No, this is just a function of part of the brain, which we can be aware of through consciousness. This is your idea of an objective truth? This is your opinion, which, someday, we may be able to prove is objectively wrong.

abiox 10y ago

"Consciousness really is unexplainable by what we know of the physical world" maybe. or perhaps it simply has a mystical privilege. there do seem to be a fair number of terms and concepts (like 'qualia') that hold sway over some people's discussion, but themselves seem questionable.

visarga 10y ago
Qualia and the hard problem are just dualism disguised. Dualism is rife with contradictions and has been largely abandoned, but now it's trying to gain acceptance again under new names. The idea that there is something special about internal states of brains, that can't be explained away, puts mental states on a special place, apart from everything else - a dualism.

visarga 10y ago

> Consciousness really is unexplainable by what we know of the physical world, it's constancy is just odd. Consciousness is just you adapting to the world. You need consciousness in order to live in the world, with all its complexity and dangers. The brain has nothing magical about it, it is made of the same kind of atoms as anything else. What is happening is just perception, judgement and action in a loop, each supported by neural networks. Every moment, a full perception-judgement-action loop plays itself. It generates a stream of experience and emotion (which is just the value or reward intuited in certain situations and actions). This internal stream of perceptions and judgements is consciousness.

hacker_9 10y ago
Amazing that every sentence you wrote is objectively wrong. I'm bored so lets go through them: 1. Consciousness is just you adapting to the world Since when did adaptation require consciousness? We're not even sure most animals are conscious, but they adapt to their conditions just fine. 2. You need consciousness in order to live in the world, with all its complexity and dangers. Where does this need come from? A self driving car could navigate the world without being conscious at all. 3. The brain has nothing magical about it, it is made of the same kind of atoms as anything else. Didn't say it was magical, but saying it's made of atoms moves this conversation along by zero percent. It's like saying computers are just a bunch of transistors, disregarding the millions of lines of code required for it to even just take my key inputs as I type out this pointless comment, and turn them into glyphs on the screen. 4. What is happening is just perception, judgement and action in a loop, each supported by neural networks. Where has this come from? We don't even know what goes on inside one neuron, let alone the billions of networks. 5. Every moment, a full perception-judgement-action loop plays itself. So what happens if I close my eyes and cover my ears? Now I am unable to perceive the world around me, and break the 'loop'. It's not like I shut down. I don't think you've thought this through. 6. It generates a stream of experience and emotion (which is just the value or reward intuited in certain situations and actions). Yes certain chemicals are released in the brain depending on your actions, but of course it's all chemicals; it's a biological system. 7. This internal stream of perceptions and judgements is consciousness. No, this is just a function of part of the brain, which we can be aware of through consciousness. All in all, there is completely no depth to your explanation at all. The fact we haven't got a definite blueprint for the brain, does really mean it is currently beyond our understanding. Neuroscientists have died of old age trying to figure out the secrets of the brain, and it's because they were looking a bit more in-depth that it's just a bunch of atoms.
- lend000 10y ago
  > Amazing that every sentence you wrote is objectively wrong. As I mentioned in my original post, most people, like yourself, will reject these very non-intuitive conclusions, probably indefinitely. Regardless, I'll point out that many of your counter-arguments to the parent comment are wrong (not saying I agree with all of his description, either). > A self driving car could navigate the world without being conscious at all. How do you define conscious? 'Feeling' just like you do? I think many modern AI's could be said to experience a different, simple form of consciousness as they process inputs. Granted, it's not useful unless you have an AI that is also more generally self-aware and communicates with us. But regardless, your hyperbolic example equated driving a car on streets with "living in the world," which you were replying to (which is an objectively ridiculous comparison). > We don't even know what goes on inside one neuron, let alone the billions of networks. Considering what NN-based deep learning has accomplished with relatively small numbers of simulated neurons with relatively simple models, I think it's safe to say that a single neuron is not as complex and mysterious as you may think. > No, this is just a function of part of the brain, which we can be aware of through consciousness. This is your idea of an objective truth? This is your opinion, which, someday, we may be able to prove is objectively wrong.