3 ms·
I don't know if anyone disagrees with the following definition: Consciousness is the perception of self, which is the result of an information model on self bu
by axilmar 4y ago
I don't know if anyone disagrees with the following definition:
Consciousness is the perception of self, which is the result of an information model on self built by the brain from a) the external experiences of the entity, b) the internal experiences of the entity.
Personally I find the above definition 'good enough' for all purposes. Are there any disagreements on the above?
- bondarchuk 4y agoThe problem is not whether or not any definition of consciousness is correct, the problem that even if it can be said to be correct, such definitions often just shift the undefinedness and hairiness of consciousness to some other term. In your specific case, for example, there are non-trivial issues with the words "perception", "self", and "internal experiences". So instead of ben_w saying >nobody really knows what "consciousness" means you just changed it to >nobody really knows what "internal experiences" means So then we haven't really gained anything in terms of being able to do rigorous science w.r.t. consciousness (except for some vague pointers, which might be valuable nonetheless).
- ben_w 4y agoIndeed. An additional problem is that "a camera pointed at a TV displaying the output of that camera" meets that definition of consciousness. I don't think that setup should be counted as conscious.