3 ms·

Panpsychism is incredibly silly. It's just obfuscated dualism. It literally doesn't explain anything, and it's obviously wrong for the simple reason that it giv

Panpsychism is incredibly silly. It's just obfuscated dualism. It literally doesn't explain anything, and it's obviously wrong for the simple reason that it gives no way to explain why humans act on their conscious experience and have it modelled internally as a conscious experience. The brain's use of electrical pulses or DNA doesn't result in an innate internal model of electricity or DNA. Similarly, if a proton has ‘experience’, then clearly ‘experience’ is a property completely outside of the computation the mind performs, and so we should not have introspective awareness of it. (Or rather, if we were to, the question of why would be no easier than the original Hard Problem.)

uoaei 7y ago
> for the simple reason that it gives no way to explain why humans act on their conscious experience and have it modelled internally as a conscious experience. The theory doesn't purport to explain internal models nor awareness in any sense that we're used to it. That is a separate question. If you are looking for those answers, they will be found in how the machination of "conscious" behavior accumulates sufficient complexity to look like directed actions from the outside.
- Veedrac 7y ago
  You're right, but only in the sense that panpsychism doesn't answer any questions. Literally any. The only thing it does is split the question of ‘where does human consciousness come from?’ into ‘how does human consciousness reduce to proton awareness?’ and ‘where does proton awareness come from?’ But you'll note that this is a harder question than the original, since it postulates more and conflicts with more evidence.
  - uoaei 7y ago
    Indeed. If we accept panpsychism, then the "hard problem" of consciousness morphs into the hard problem of how awareness arises, and what degree of awareness and understanding is present in a given individual.
keiferski 7y ago
Panpsychism is often put forth as a solution to the dualism/physicalism problem. That is...sort of the entire point. To call it obfuscated dualism is to completely misunderstand the idea, so much so that I have a hard time believing you've read any material on the topic. This is covered in the introductory paragraph of the SEP article: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/
- Veedrac 7y ago
  Panpsychism is often claimed to be a solution to these things. I've never actually seen any argument that would defend the thesis. I say panpsychism is obfuscated dualism because it involves no causal mechanisms anywhere, and even worse its entire construction rules out there being any non-convoluted causal mechanism. I'm not as unread on the topic as you imply. I'm no professional philosopher, but I've opened a Chalmers PDF on the topic or two.
turk73 7y ago
Before you discard it, consider the example of America's runaway bureaucracy. It is completely operated and dependent on humans, but somehow it has a life of its own, and intelligence of its own, and is able to ward off threats such as budget cuts, consolidation, etc. The AI we have constructed isn't just on computers, it is us.

uoaei 7y ago

> for the simple reason that it gives no way to explain why humans act on their conscious experience and have it modelled internally as a conscious experience. The theory doesn't purport to explain internal models nor awareness in any sense that we're used to it. That is a separate question. If you are looking for those answers, they will be found in how the machination of "conscious" behavior accumulates sufficient complexity to look like directed actions from the outside.

Veedrac 7y ago
You're right, but only in the sense that panpsychism doesn't answer any questions. Literally any. The only thing it does is split the question of ‘where does human consciousness come from?’ into ‘how does human consciousness reduce to proton awareness?’ and ‘where does proton awareness come from?’ But you'll note that this is a harder question than the original, since it postulates more and conflicts with more evidence.
- uoaei 7y ago
  Indeed. If we accept panpsychism, then the "hard problem" of consciousness morphs into the hard problem of how awareness arises, and what degree of awareness and understanding is present in a given individual.

keiferski 7y ago

Panpsychism is often put forth as a solution to the dualism/physicalism problem. That is...sort of the entire point. To call it obfuscated dualism is to completely misunderstand the idea, so much so that I have a hard time believing you've read any material on the topic. This is covered in the introductory paragraph of the SEP article: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/panpsychism/

Veedrac 7y ago
Panpsychism is often claimed to be a solution to these things. I've never actually seen any argument that would defend the thesis. I say panpsychism is obfuscated dualism because it involves no causal mechanisms anywhere, and even worse its entire construction rules out there being any non-convoluted causal mechanism. I'm not as unread on the topic as you imply. I'm no professional philosopher, but I've opened a Chalmers PDF on the topic or two.

turk73 7y ago

Before you discard it, consider the example of America's runaway bureaucracy. It is completely operated and dependent on humans, but somehow it has a life of its own, and intelligence of its own, and is able to ward off threats such as budget cuts, consolidation, etc. The AI we have constructed isn't just on computers, it is us.