3 ms·
There’s nothing in known physics that explains consciousness. I agree about the rest, but consciousness not only defies explanation by known physics, it’s so fa
by wat10000 1y ago
There’s nothing in known physics that explains consciousness. I agree about the rest, but consciousness not only defies explanation by known physics, it’s so far beyond what’s known that there isn’t even any concept of what it could be. We barely have the ability to describe it, let alone explain it.
- foobarian 1y agoConsciousness is very interesting because if you postulate that you can't possibly create it by running a Turing machine, then anything that is simulatable can't be the mechanism behind it. Which would raise the followup question, what is? My money is on some quantum effect.
- tucnak 1y agoOr rather that the whole premise is wrong? I say, take Wittgensteinian stance on the matter, and who cares it's been 50 years.
- tim333 1y agoYou can produce some rich audio and visual effects in the form of music and movies that can be played on the turing machine that is a laptop. I think it's possible that consciousness is along those lines.
- potamic 1y agoBut is consciousness even a thing? Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the one making a claim that there exists something called consciousness? If they cannot show evidence that such a thing exists or may exist, then for all purposes it does not exist.
- amenhotep 1y agoIf you want to pretend you don't exist, that's your business. I think we both know you do.
- potamic 1y agoThat's not how science works. You have to devise an experiment that can independently validate the assertion.
- wat10000 1y agoI don’t need to prove it to anybody. I know it’s a thing, that’s good enough for me.
- potamic 1y agoIt's not good enough for science. How do you approach it so it can be independently verified?
- wat10000 1y agoThat’s why it’s such a hard problem. We barely have the language to talk about it. We have no way to observe it in other people. We have no way to measure it. And we have no idea how these things could even be done in theory.
- potamic 1y agoOne could say the same thing about a higher power as well. But the scientific stance is clear on that one.
- wat10000 1y agoSort of. Many people state a direct experience with a higher power as the source of their belief in one, so it is similar. But not quite the same, because consciousness is the thing doing the experiencing. It’s more fundamental in that way. The experience of a higher power could be false, in that it’s not really a higher power. But it is some experience. Consciousness can’t be false in that way. These debates always leave me wondering if some people aren’t actually conscious. Some of these arguments wouldn’t make any sense to someone who actually experiences qualia. I liken it to the old debate over the existence of mental imagery, which was finally settled as being something that some people have and some don’t. But until that was figured out, the two sides just didn’t comprehend each other.
- codedokode 1y agoWhat's special about consciousness? I assume it is just a sequence of thoughts/images inside the brain and that's all? Like when a cat sees a cheese and an image of its taste appears instantly and motivates it to come closer. Human is the same, I think.
- wat10000 1y agoWhat’s special is qualia. Subjective experience. Thoughts and images could occur within a brain without that, and there’s no explanation for how there’s a subjective experience of those things, or even a serious notion of what is doing the experiencing, beyond vague handwaving about “consciousness.” But something is.