3 ms·
It's my comment he's responding to, and even though I may not agree with his formulation, I'm sensing he has a point. What if this is a bias that we've acquired
by hliyan 5y ago
It's my comment he's responding to, and even though I may not agree with his formulation, I'm sensing he has a point. What if this is a bias that we've acquired while growing up? Perhaps we've conflated consciousness with intent and reactivity (another term introduced by Jaynes 40 years ago). We've gotten used to thinking that a chair, for example, is not conscious by our definition because it reacts in a purely non-intentional way. But does that mean it doesn't have some rudimentary level of "experience" (sans pain, pleasure, a sense of self or other things that come with higher intelligence)?
- andybak 5y agoI agree "consciousness" is a hodgepotch of different things, some of which are easier to fit into a materialist world view than others. But that doesn't detract from my belief that there's an irreducible nub that remains once you've removed all the easy bits. That nub is what I regard as the "hard problem"