4 ms·

I am not sure what this article is trying to accomplish. Consciousness might be binary, so rabbits might have it? Can you define consciousness at all?

zwkrt 5y ago
Just shitposting: How about “the number of bits a subsection of a system is able to encode about the rest of the system surrounding it”
- oceanghost 5y ago
  I appreciate about HN that your, fairly amusing comment is "shitposting." :-)
- erikhoel 5y ago
  Ah, but what about the subsections of the subsections? And so, ad infinitum? Eventually you'll need something like the exclusion postulate of Integrated Information Theory
maybe_pablo 5y ago
Isn't consciousness the feeling of existing?
- oceanghost 5y ago
  Well the problem is that science makes predictions, and that is all. If we want to talk scientifically about consciousness then we need to be able to make predictions about it and test those... then refine our ideas. Up until that point its metaphysics or religion. Do I agree that rabbits are probably somewhat conscious? Yes. Do I know what that MEANS? No.
- justshowpost 5y ago
  That's self-consciousness or self-awareness, a bit different thing, the next level for winners of the mirror test.
AlbertCory 5y ago
He can speak for himself, so I'm not interpreting him here, but: This was an excellent article. To me "consciousness" cannot be thought of as binary, i.e. humans have it, no other creature does. That's the classical, religious view. Rather it's just an illusion your brain puts on for you, and rabbits get a different illusion. So it's silly to say "animals are more conscious." They have a different consciousness. Go ahead and google "what is it like to be a bat."
- oceanghost 5y ago
  Honestly, I thought your view was the default of most people?
  - AlbertCory 5y ago
    Maybe, but oceans of ink over the millennia have been spilled on the question of "how does mind differ from matter?" Maybe you're right and we're beyond all that.
shusaku 5y ago
The author isn’t trying to answer a philosophical or scientific question, but instead just commenting on how we often have aesthetic views of consciousness. So just like he feels like the man on the subway is conscious due to his expressed emotions, he also feels like the rabbit is conscious due to the liveliness of its movements. That’s contrasted with his own view of himself, which while ironically he knows he is conscious, he feels his lack of vigor is a huge limitation.

zwkrt 5y ago

Just shitposting: How about “the number of bits a subsection of a system is able to encode about the rest of the system surrounding it”

oceanghost 5y ago
I appreciate about HN that your, fairly amusing comment is "shitposting." :-)
erikhoel 5y ago
Ah, but what about the subsections of the subsections? And so, ad infinitum? Eventually you'll need something like the exclusion postulate of Integrated Information Theory

maybe_pablo 5y ago

Isn't consciousness the feeling of existing?

oceanghost 5y ago
Well the problem is that science makes predictions, and that is all. If we want to talk scientifically about consciousness then we need to be able to make predictions about it and test those... then refine our ideas. Up until that point its metaphysics or religion. Do I agree that rabbits are probably somewhat conscious? Yes. Do I know what that MEANS? No.
justshowpost 5y ago
That's self-consciousness or self-awareness, a bit different thing, the next level for winners of the mirror test.

AlbertCory 5y ago

He can speak for himself, so I'm not interpreting him here, but: This was an excellent article. To me "consciousness" cannot be thought of as binary, i.e. humans have it, no other creature does. That's the classical, religious view. Rather it's just an illusion your brain puts on for you, and rabbits get a different illusion. So it's silly to say "animals are more conscious." They have a different consciousness. Go ahead and google "what is it like to be a bat."

oceanghost 5y ago
Honestly, I thought your view was the default of most people?
- AlbertCory 5y ago
  Maybe, but oceans of ink over the millennia have been spilled on the question of "how does mind differ from matter?" Maybe you're right and we're beyond all that.

shusaku 5y ago

The author isn’t trying to answer a philosophical or scientific question, but instead just commenting on how we often have aesthetic views of consciousness. So just like he feels like the man on the subway is conscious due to his expressed emotions, he also feels like the rabbit is conscious due to the liveliness of its movements. That’s contrasted with his own view of himself, which while ironically he knows he is conscious, he feels his lack of vigor is a huge limitation.