4 ms·

I think the opposite problem - or rather the assumed explanation - is harder. Start with empiricism: conciousness appears when we add other mental capacities,

by GlennS 5y ago

I think the opposite problem - or rather the assumed explanation - is harder. Start with empiricism: conciousness appears when we add other mental capacities, so probably it is built upon them. The idea that conciousness (or abstraction) is a fundamental building block (as espoused by neoplatonists) is a much more unlikely explanation to me. > I am not like a block of steel, but I don't know why. Let's start from here. This is obviously correct, I think? Why should I know why? Most of my conciousness is build on top of unconcious processes that I can't control and only receive input from.

CuriouslyC 5y ago
That's a nice looking dead end, because your subjectivity biases you. Instead, step outside your own consciousness. Based on objective observation, you are dynamic and reactive, steel is static and mostly unreactive. Beyond that, you might as well be the same. You claim to experience your existence, but what evidence do you have? And what evidence do you have that a bar of steel doesn't experience something of some sort?
- GlennS 5y ago
  > That's a nice looking dead end, because your subjectivity biases you. Instead, step outside your own consciousness. Don't understand, sorry. > You claim to experience your existence, but what evidence do you have? Others also make that claim. We appear to each-other to be similar. > And what evidence do you have that a bar of steel doesn't experience something of some sort? Magnetic scanners. Strong evidence in my opinion. I think you shouldn't start with steel, you should start with chemicals that produce nervous signals.
  - nickelpro 5y ago
    > Magnetic scanners. Strong evidence in my opinion. > I think you shouldn't start with steel, you should start with chemicals that produce nervous signals. The idea being that none of this is direct evidence of consciousness. These give you evidence for answers to soft problems, a block of steel cannot see because it does not have eyes to see. If you attached eyes it would not see, because it would not have an optical cortex. If you gave it an optical cortex it would not see because it does not have... etc. You can solve all of these soft problems, but they would never tell you how the block of steel experiences the color red, the "qualia" of vision. That's the hard problem. All of the soft problems are "minor" by comparison.

by GlennS 5y ago

CuriouslyC 5y ago

That's a nice looking dead end, because your subjectivity biases you. Instead, step outside your own consciousness. Based on objective observation, you are dynamic and reactive, steel is static and mostly unreactive. Beyond that, you might as well be the same. You claim to experience your existence, but what evidence do you have? And what evidence do you have that a bar of steel doesn't experience something of some sort?

GlennS 5y ago
> That's a nice looking dead end, because your subjectivity biases you. Instead, step outside your own consciousness. Don't understand, sorry. > You claim to experience your existence, but what evidence do you have? Others also make that claim. We appear to each-other to be similar. > And what evidence do you have that a bar of steel doesn't experience something of some sort? Magnetic scanners. Strong evidence in my opinion. I think you shouldn't start with steel, you should start with chemicals that produce nervous signals.
- nickelpro 5y ago
  > Magnetic scanners. Strong evidence in my opinion. > I think you shouldn't start with steel, you should start with chemicals that produce nervous signals. The idea being that none of this is direct evidence of consciousness. These give you evidence for answers to soft problems, a block of steel cannot see because it does not have eyes to see. If you attached eyes it would not see, because it would not have an optical cortex. If you gave it an optical cortex it would not see because it does not have... etc. You can solve all of these soft problems, but they would never tell you how the block of steel experiences the color red, the "qualia" of vision. That's the hard problem. All of the soft problems are "minor" by comparison.