3 ms·
I think by "consciousness" he may mean a different thing than I was expecting. My definition goes back to the classic Cartesian "I think, therefore I am", thoug
by inklesspen 18y ago
I think by "consciousness" he may mean a different thing than I was expecting. My definition goes back to the classic Cartesian "I think, therefore I am", though I reject his subsequent dualism.
I think a brain-in-a-jar could also realize that he exists; he thinks, after all, if life support is there. Of course, the world may well be necessary for consciousness; maybe a brain-in-a-jar would never realize that he exists. But the world is not involved in the "being conscious", any more than the road is involved in my driving on it.
- tdoggette 18y agoFTA: "Consciousness requires the joint operation of the brain, the body and the world." Well, yeah. Things occur in the the world, and then the brain interprets them, decides what to do, and has the body do it. I don't see how this interferes at all with the notion of brain-as-self. I'm not upset by the idea that (as the later example in the article) the love I feel is a chemical reaction. As the interviewee says, it's all context. Me (that is, brain) interprets things based on context, and assigns value to them based on that context. I, for lack of a better word, like "love," whatever it is. Of course the brain is consciousness. It's doesn't exist in isolation, sure, but I think that it is both necessary and sufficient for the human experience, as inklesspen says above.
- jimbokun 18y ago"any more than the road is involved in my driving on it." The road is absolutely involved in you driving on it. If it was not there, you certainly would not be driving on it.
- electromagnetic 18y agoBut you can drive off the road.
- branden 18y agoThe road does not actively participate in your driving; it is indifferent to it. Were you not driving, the road would still be there. s/road/world/ s/driving/thinking/