3 ms·
Really? + Human beings + Dogs + Bugs + Plants + Eukaryotes + Viruses + Proteins + Molecules + Atoms + Subatomic Particles + ??? + Pure Information,
by mlsu 4y ago
Really?
+ Human beings
+ Dogs
+ Bugs
+ Plants
+ Eukaryotes
+ Viruses
+ Proteins
+ Molecules
+ Atoms
+ Subatomic Particles
+ ???
+ Pure Information, ones and zeros
Here is a line (--------). Place it so that above it, things are conscious, and below it, things are not conscious. It seems very obvious to me that there is nothing special about human beings, (or dogs, or bugs, or plants, or wherever you draw the line), that makes them special and conscious. For example; if you assert that the line is at "Bugs" I could not possibly disprove or prove you right, although I would suspect that you might be a Bug. Likewise, I could assert that your circuit has qualia, and you could never prove or disprove me.
Proving or disproving me is solving the hard problem. It's hard because it's meaningless, because consciousness is either shared by all things; or, shared by no things. Which is, imho, a distinction without a difference.
- mlsu 4y agoAs an aside, you can trivially place the line above humans: + ??? + The Galaxy + The entire Biosphere + Regions of Space + Corporations + Humans
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago> because consciousness is either shared by all things; or, shared by no things. Alternative: it is shared by 192 kinds of things, and nothing else. Why not?
- mlsu 4y agoIndeed, why not. I couldn't possibly prove you wrong or right. That's why the hard problem does not exist and there is no line.
- RHSman2 4y agoCheck out Peter Russell. The person closest to the mark for me. If you know of him the above is that but if not, he is amazing.
- namero999 4y agoNice to see him mentioned. He's very little known, yet one who can argue properly and one of the few that make much sense.