3 ms·
The word "consciousness" needs to be used very carefully. There is no scientific experiment that anyone can do that would demonstrate anything "experiences" ev
by Xcelerate 14y ago
The word "consciousness" needs to be used very carefully. There is no scientific experiment that anyone can do that would demonstrate anything "experiences" events. In fact, scientifically speaking, you can only be certain that you yourself are experiencing something.
This is of course more of a philosophical area than a scientific one. Do most humans perceive "red" as the same experience? It's not really something that can be tested. Sure, you can measure how sensitive cone cells are to certain wavelengths and compare that among groups, but I'll never know if my red is your blue.
The scientific document itself does a decent job of staying out of the philosophical questions. Science concerns itself with reproducible, testable predictions. Using a word that has strong connotations with philosophy (also words like "qualia") should be discouraged in scientific practice simply due to the controversy it would generate that would detract from further progress. Studies of "synaptic activity patterns" is perhaps a better description.
- derrida 14y ago> In fact, scientifically speaking, you can only be certain that you yourself are experiencing something. I ask someone 'you know the redness of red', they nod knowingly. Thus I know they have experiences.
- Xcelerate 14y agoYou could ask a well-programmed robot the same question and it would also nod. What makes something "experience" something?
- rosser 14y agoSuppose for a moment that, unbeknownst to you, the reality you experience were a giant, perfect-fidelity sim. Suppose, further, that everyone in the sim but you is an "NPC" — that is, you're the only "real" person there. Again, you don't know this. Now, suppose you asked one of these NPCs about the redness of red. It nods. Is it somehow suddenly conscious because it could nod sagely in response to your question?
- andyl 14y ago"In fact, scientifically speaking, you can only be certain that you yourself are experiencing something." How can you be certain?
- rosser 14y agoHas anyone, anywhere, ever had an experience of someone else's experience? Until you can directly experience someone else's experiential state, the best you can do is posit that they even have one, let alone trying to talk about what it might be like. In philosophical terms, this is the problem of Epistemic Asymmetry. It's part of the so-called Hard Problem of Consciousness.
- Strilanc 14y agoThere are absolutely conceivable experiments that can demonstrate experience. For example, suppose we found that temporarily disabling some part of the brain (with a strong magnetic field) temporarily suppresses conscious experience. You try it on yourself. Afterwards you remember doing things but not being conscious of them. This is scientific evidence (note: not proof) that any animal with a corresponding brain part is conscious.
- Xcelerate 14y agoI'm not sure I understand -- if you remember doing things, wouldn't you also remember being conscious of doing them? (Regardless of whether or not you actually were). For instance, let's suppose we get advanced enough one day to implant fake memories. You would remember experiencing them even though you never actually did those things. But this is two separate concepts: memory and experience. Experience can only ever occur at the current moment in time.
- Strilanc 14y agoIt might be a bit more indirect, like no one in this state understands consciousness but they are still capable of introspection. In essence I'm just saying consciousness affects the world (e.g. it vibrates the air one way instead of another when we talk about it). This implies we can create experiments to learn about it through its effects on the world.