3 ms·
Looking at neurons doesn’t explain the plane of consciousness.
by mensetmanusman 2y ago
Looking at neurons doesn’t explain the plane of consciousness.
- hn_throwaway_99 2y agoSo? That doesn't rebut the comment you are replying to, which basically states that currently our only window at all into consciousness is through neurons and their networks. At least neuroscientists are actually looking at the only physical medium we know of that can hold consciousness. Everyone else is just basically philosophizing, at least until anyone can show some other medium capable of holding consciousness.
- mensetmanusman 2y agoOur understanding of physical mediums is also new, it’s fields all the way down :7
- hn_throwaway_99 2y agoSure, and if you want to study physics, at some point you need to experiment in the real world. If you want to study consciousness, that means you need to study the only medium we know that can evoke that phenomenon.
- hshshshsvsv 2y agoAgain. We don't know it can evoke consciousness. It's an assumption of materialisam. If consciousness is fundamental you don't need that argument.
- hshshshsvsv 2y agoWhat the hell you mean by neurons holding consciousness lol.
- dekhn 2y agoThis is known as "the neural correlates of consciousness": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_correlates_of_consciousness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_correlates_of_conscious... By and large, the current scientific assumption is that everything required for consciousness exists within the physics of neurons, rather than, say, epithilial cells on your feet, or magic brainions that haven't been detected yet. Of course this is greatly simplified- a disembodied brain with no body probably can't sustain consciousness, but As far as we can tell, consciousness is an emergent property of brains which is wholly explicable using scientific methods.