3 ms·

A lack of definite knowledge isn’t an excuse to fantasize. Every time people have insisted that the gaps in our knowledge imply gods or ghosts, they’re rudely d

A lack of definite knowledge isn’t an excuse to fantasize. Every time people have insisted that the gaps in our knowledge imply gods or ghosts, they’re rudely disabused. Every time we learn more about how things work, it turns out magic isn’t a factor at all. Meanwhile we really desperately want to believe in magic. It’s probsbly a good idea to be skeptical of God of The Gaps arguments that appeal to what we wish were true in the face of what appears to be more likely.

CalRobert 8y ago
I am not trying to appeal to any supernatural explanation. The closest (crude) example I can think of is seeing the effect of a magnet on iron filings for years and then finally determining there's a magnetic field involved. Without study I suppose somebody could conclude that iron filings just really liked magnets and creating interesting formations. I am curious as to the mechanism behind the... subjective experience of being, I guess. Ultimately, I was simply unsure about the assertion that all parties would naturally agree (without support) to "once you accept that humans are fully physical, embodied minds in a sea of whatever chemicals can cross the blood-brain barrier". This raises a number of questions, which other people have raised before (Does consciousness require a wet brain or just the information processing that goes on within (or something else)? is a computer that simulates the processes of a brain conscious? Is a computer that simulates 1% of the processes of a brain conscious? I am conscious now, and if my brain were dissolved in acid I would not be, but what structures and processes must be destroyed or interrupted to bring about that end to consciousness, and is it a discrete or continuous phenomenon? Are computers now conscious but only infinitesimally so? Is there a degree of consciousness in any structure that processes information? How would we even know? What is consciousness?) I would try to elaborate, but really it's better described at the articles (and sources for same) here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness I accept this comment is weak. However, it's not an assertion as to what the nature of consciousness is.

CalRobert 8y ago

I am not trying to appeal to any supernatural explanation. The closest (crude) example I can think of is seeing the effect of a magnet on iron filings for years and then finally determining there's a magnetic field involved. Without study I suppose somebody could conclude that iron filings just really liked magnets and creating interesting formations. I am curious as to the mechanism behind the... subjective experience of being, I guess. Ultimately, I was simply unsure about the assertion that all parties would naturally agree (without support) to "once you accept that humans are fully physical, embodied minds in a sea of whatever chemicals can cross the blood-brain barrier". This raises a number of questions, which other people have raised before (Does consciousness require a wet brain or just the information processing that goes on within (or something else)? is a computer that simulates the processes of a brain conscious? Is a computer that simulates 1% of the processes of a brain conscious? I am conscious now, and if my brain were dissolved in acid I would not be, but what structures and processes must be destroyed or interrupted to bring about that end to consciousness, and is it a discrete or continuous phenomenon? Are computers now conscious but only infinitesimally so? Is there a degree of consciousness in any structure that processes information? How would we even know? What is consciousness?) I would try to elaborate, but really it's better described at the articles (and sources for same) here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness I accept this comment is weak. However, it's not an assertion as to what the nature of consciousness is.