2 ms·

I'd strongly agree there are no non-contradictory definitions of consciousness among those that commonly appear. But it's a category that, despite these contrad

I'd strongly agree there are no non-contradictory definitions of consciousness among those that commonly appear. But it's a category that, despite these contradiction, hasn't become marginal in the fashion of the aether or the theory of the flat earth. I think this because people indeed need it to bridge the biological world and the world of ethics and legality. I think that if we have a system of legality and systems of opportunity humans should be legally equal persons and have equal opportunity. But humans are manifestly unequal (though overall more incomparable than orderable in a system of ranks). Most people need some concept of essence to justify ethical equality among people. And so consciousness stays in people's minds however contradictory. Which I think gives the article's point validity. Confused definitions of consciousness can give really confused ideas about ethical behavior regards "intelligent" computer programs. And things are confusing enough otherwise.

qarl 17d ago
> Confused definitions of consciousness can give really confused ideas about ethical behavior regards "intelligent" computer programs. Is that what's going on? If these things were conscious, then their creators wouldn't be responsible for their actions? That's the crux of the disagreement? That's super interesting. Thank you.
- joe_the_user 16d ago
  Is that what's going on? If these things were conscious, then their creators wouldn't be responsible for their actions? That's the crux of the disagreement? No and the passage of mine you quote says nothing like that.
fc417fc802 17d ago
> despite these contradiction, hasn't become marginal in the fashion of the aether or the theory of the flat earth. I think this because people indeed need it to bridge the biological world and the world of ethics and legality. Sometimes the replies in these threads leave me wondering if p-zombies are real. It isn't that there are contradictions, it's that we literally do not know how to define the thing. And it has not fallen out of fashion because it is self evidently real - we all experience it. We don't need it in order to bridge anything. Legality and ethics are largely game theory, however there are some aspects of both that only exist due to it. So it isn't some abstract concept used to bridge other concepts but rather a concrete thing that influences our way of doing things.
- Loquebantur 17d ago
  People feigning inability to define "consciousness" is a social phenomenon, not a scientific miracle. The reason is something akin to "stigma", where people refrain from attempting it because they fear the social repercussions. Normally, you go about defining concepts by approaching it systematically. Capturing aspects of the phenomenon until you have exhausted them all.
  - fc417fc802 17d ago
    Feigning? Okay then you go ahead and prove your claim by demonstration. Rigorously define the term such that I can objectively prove that my dog is conscious and that the rocks in my backyard aren't conscious. Then I'll finally be able to figure out whether or not various insects are (I sure hope wasps aren't otherwise I'm probably some sort of war criminal).
- mitxela 16d ago
  Consciousness is to our universe as a video game player is to the in-game universe. Some games even call player connections "souls" or "minds" - a character belonging to a player who's lost connection may be "unconscious" or a "zombie". Game characters, unless they've been made to break the fourth wall, have no idea what this means or why this happens. I don't mean to imply our universe is a video game, since it would be games all the way up.

qarl 17d ago

> Confused definitions of consciousness can give really confused ideas about ethical behavior regards "intelligent" computer programs. Is that what's going on? If these things were conscious, then their creators wouldn't be responsible for their actions? That's the crux of the disagreement? That's super interesting. Thank you.

joe_the_user 16d ago
Is that what's going on? If these things were conscious, then their creators wouldn't be responsible for their actions? That's the crux of the disagreement? No and the passage of mine you quote says nothing like that.

fc417fc802 17d ago

> despite these contradiction, hasn't become marginal in the fashion of the aether or the theory of the flat earth. I think this because people indeed need it to bridge the biological world and the world of ethics and legality. Sometimes the replies in these threads leave me wondering if p-zombies are real. It isn't that there are contradictions, it's that we literally do not know how to define the thing. And it has not fallen out of fashion because it is self evidently real - we all experience it. We don't need it in order to bridge anything. Legality and ethics are largely game theory, however there are some aspects of both that only exist due to it. So it isn't some abstract concept used to bridge other concepts but rather a concrete thing that influences our way of doing things.

Loquebantur 17d ago
People feigning inability to define "consciousness" is a social phenomenon, not a scientific miracle. The reason is something akin to "stigma", where people refrain from attempting it because they fear the social repercussions. Normally, you go about defining concepts by approaching it systematically. Capturing aspects of the phenomenon until you have exhausted them all.
- fc417fc802 17d ago
  Feigning? Okay then you go ahead and prove your claim by demonstration. Rigorously define the term such that I can objectively prove that my dog is conscious and that the rocks in my backyard aren't conscious. Then I'll finally be able to figure out whether or not various insects are (I sure hope wasps aren't otherwise I'm probably some sort of war criminal).
mitxela 16d ago
Consciousness is to our universe as a video game player is to the in-game universe. Some games even call player connections "souls" or "minds" - a character belonging to a player who's lost connection may be "unconscious" or a "zombie". Game characters, unless they've been made to break the fourth wall, have no idea what this means or why this happens. I don't mean to imply our universe is a video game, since it would be games all the way up.