3 ms·
But I also have other organs, such as my stomach, and arbitrary lumps of matter such as my elbow and my bicycle, none of which are sufficient to maintain the ou
by card_zero 3y ago
But I also have other organs, such as my stomach, and arbitrary lumps of matter such as my elbow and my bicycle, none of which are sufficient to maintain the outward signs of consciousness after the brain is destroyed (or merely dosed with gin). So consciousness, which apparently resided in the brain and then went away when the brain was disrupted, didn't go to any of those places. Similarly, when my stomach ceases to digest or my bicycle ceases to roll forward, the digestive function doesn't migrate to the brain and the rolling function isn't taken over by the elbow. So we can choose in each case between the hypothesis "physically stopped working" or "metaphysically sent its function to another mysterious place", and again I'll appeal to parsimony on this one: why should the function be transferred somewhere mysterious by a means outside of our experience and ability to explain? And why make this claim about consciousness alone, out of all the functions that things in the world have? There's a kind of fallacy going on here along the lines of "I can't fully explain what this thing is, therefore every kind of mysterious and magical supposition can be roped into its service and claim plausibility."
- skissane 3y ago> And why make this claim about consciousness alone, out of all the functions that things in the world have? Because consciousness is fundamental in a way none of those things in the world are. It is only through our own consciousness that we can know those other things exist, indeed that we can ever know anything at all. Treating consciousness as just a thing among things ignores that it is essential, foundational, to all other things as we know them, as we can know them.