5 ms·

I think self consciousness is the sticking point for a mechanical or probabilistic universe. It exists. It eludes quantifiable definition. It makes no sense in

I think self consciousness is the sticking point for a mechanical or probabilistic universe. It exists. It eludes quantifiable definition. It makes no sense in a mechanism. It is central to free will.

tremon 5y ago
What if self-consciousness is merely awareness of the choices your clockwork body makes?
- usgroup 5y ago
  As long as self awareness is an input at least in part independent of the rest of the world, if makes your outputs non deterministic if it’s not taken into account. Yet self awareness defies explanation at the moment. Ie there is no known way to account for it.
mensetmanusman 5y ago
This is true. It’s obvious we have free will, it’s obvious that an atomistic body can’t support that alone, but no one wants to talk about it ;)
- nefitty 5y ago
  If I hallucinate prismatic shapes overlaying everything, it does not follow that there is some non-physical phenomenon which is responsible. “It is obvious that the world is covered in prisms. It’s obvious that those prisms don’t fit in my eyeballs, therefore the entire scientific edifice is mistaken and we need a metaphysical explanation for my experience.”
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago
    Comparing free will to a hallucination isn’t helpful because everyone knows the difference and has experienced them.
    - w0de0 5y ago
      No, actually, that’s the point they allude to: that free will might be an illusion, a hallucination. No one denies the lived experience of free will, the inquiry into it asks if we can quantify that qualia without resorting to complete determinism. If we can’t, it is perhaps an illusion. There is ample precedent for lived experience being an illusory lie told to our minds by our brains - visual hallucinations are the closest example to hand.
      - mensetmanusman 5y ago
        Beings without free will can’t prove anything though since the verbs available to a being without free will is an empty set, and passive descriptions are more apt.
        w0de0 5y ago
        I don’t think free will and autonomous action as described by a verb are equivalent.

tremon 5y ago

What if self-consciousness is merely awareness of the choices your clockwork body makes?

usgroup 5y ago
As long as self awareness is an input at least in part independent of the rest of the world, if makes your outputs non deterministic if it’s not taken into account. Yet self awareness defies explanation at the moment. Ie there is no known way to account for it.

mensetmanusman 5y ago

This is true. It’s obvious we have free will, it’s obvious that an atomistic body can’t support that alone, but no one wants to talk about it ;)

nefitty 5y ago
If I hallucinate prismatic shapes overlaying everything, it does not follow that there is some non-physical phenomenon which is responsible. “It is obvious that the world is covered in prisms. It’s obvious that those prisms don’t fit in my eyeballs, therefore the entire scientific edifice is mistaken and we need a metaphysical explanation for my experience.”
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  Comparing free will to a hallucination isn’t helpful because everyone knows the difference and has experienced them.
  - w0de0 5y ago
    No, actually, that’s the point they allude to: that free will might be an illusion, a hallucination. No one denies the lived experience of free will, the inquiry into it asks if we can quantify that qualia without resorting to complete determinism. If we can’t, it is perhaps an illusion. There is ample precedent for lived experience being an illusory lie told to our minds by our brains - visual hallucinations are the closest example to hand.
    - mensetmanusman 5y ago
      Beings without free will can’t prove anything though since the verbs available to a being without free will is an empty set, and passive descriptions are more apt.
      - w0de0 5y ago
        I don’t think free will and autonomous action as described by a verb are equivalent.