Originally posted by Mindship
Everything said here (indeed, both sides of this discussion) still stems from something the materialist considers unimportant.In effect: "Consciousness is an illusion," said the illusion.
the illusion doesn't say anything.
EDIT: an organism produces behaviour. the "inimalist" organism produced a response based on memory and linguistic systems prompting motor action on a keyboard.
Originally posted by inimalist
the illusion doesn't say anything.EDIT: an organism produces behaviour. the "inimalist" organism produced a response based on memory and linguistic systems prompting motor action on a keyboard.
But what you and I experience right now, directly, immediately, is not electrochemical activity; it's, well, something which can't be materially verified. That is a bummer. Nonetheless, it is through this immediate, immaterial (meaningless) faculty that we're forming and expressing ideas about it.
Originally posted by Mindship
The materialist view is that, basically, consciousness is along for the ride. We could remove it from the body and have the human automaton function just as effectively (or at least, measure it doing so). Empirical science makes this a powerful POV.But what you and I experience right now, directly, immediately, is not electrochemical activity; it's, well, something which can't be materially verified. That is a bummer. Nonetheless, it is through this immediate, immaterial (meaningless) faculty that we're forming and expressing ideas about it.
It is a balanced wave cause by the function of the living body.
Originally posted by lord xyz
What I'm trying to find out is, the whole idea of self-awareness and our morals and emotions. All these thought processed aspects, how does it fit in science and our survival, when it seems so mystical?
The mystical is based largely on society. Modern western society is awash in egoist transcendence style beliefs that come from all over the world, but all emphasize the importance of the "self" or the significance of the individual in the universe. We are taught from a very early age, especially through school and general culture, that consciousness and emotions are the realm of the mystics, often represented as minorities who do some type of exotic practice or as a tripped out hippy philosopher or whatever.
The study and understanding of the self in a rational and sober light is not something that people want to do, largely because, as you expressed, it is so mystical in the first place. Reductionism in this regard just doesn't mesh with the modern social climate in which people define what consciousness is.
With regard to where the things which create our existential experience of the world come from, from an evolutionary context, that is way beyond anyone's ability to answer. Clearly, many of our morals are based on biological imperatives that even we don't necessarily understand all the time, and clearly others are based on cultural practice passed down for ages, maybe with some biological roots, or potentially none. Deciphering which are strictly natural vs a product of our society seems difficult to the point of trivializing the task.
Originally posted by Mindship
The materialist view is that, basically, consciousness is along for the ride. We could remove it from the body and have the human automaton function just as effectively (or at least, measure it doing so). Empirical science makes this a powerful POV.
I don't pretend to be making a "materialist" argument, but what I am saying is that consciousness isn't even along for the ride. All these wonderful things you attribute to consciousness are far better explained through the interaction of localized and interconnected brain regions rather than a central agent of causality.
Nobody is trying to minimize the power of subjective experience or top-down control of function. What I am saying is that there is a disconnect between how it feels like that is happening and how it actually is. Just because you feel like you are the agent of cause for your behaviour does not make it so. In fact, that feeling of agency comes only after biological preparedness.
Originally posted by Mindship
But what you and I experience right now, directly, immediately, is not electrochemical activity;
Though it is predictable based on measures of neuronal activity, can be predictably modified through electromagnetic stimulation, and is specifically reliant on physical structures?
Originally posted by Mindship
it's, well, something which can't be materially verified. That is a bummer.
30-50m/hz gamma bandwidth osculations.
and many other ways. There are many material and empirical measures of subjective experience. They are new and sloppy, but this seems to be the "consciousness of the gaps" argument.
Originally posted by Mindship
Nonetheless, it is through this immediate, immaterial (meaningless) faculty that we're forming and expressing ideas about it.
Certainly not. Your ideas are formed well before your "consciousness" is aware of them.
there is a huge debate at the moment over whether consciousness resides ONLY in complex brains....and the only brain complex enough is the human brain. if you agree to this argument, then consciousness pretty much is a the latest step in evolution. its not to hard to imagine, given that the cerebral cortex is the latest step of evolution (on the physical plane) and it is already known to house the "higher order" activities of our mind.
Originally posted by inimalist
I don't pretend to be making a "materialist" argument, but what I am saying is that consciousness isn't even along for the ride. All these wonderful things you attribute to consciousness are far better explained through the interaction of localized and interconnected brain regions rather than a central agent of causality.Nobody is trying to minimize the power of subjective experience or top-down control of function. What I am saying is that there is a disconnect between how it feels like that is happening and how it actually is. Just because you feel like you are the agent of cause for your behaviour does not make it so. In fact, that feeling of agency comes only after biological preparedness.
Though it is predictable based on measures of neuronal activity, can be predictably modified through electromagnetic stimulation, and is specifically reliant on physical structures?
30-50m/hz gamma bandwidth osculations.
and many other ways. There are many material and empirical measures of subjective experience. They are new and sloppy, but this seems to be the "consciousness of the gaps" argument.
Certainly not. Your ideas are formed well before your "consciousness" is aware of them.
Brain functioning is certainly easier to understand because it is amenable to empirical study. It provides, at the very least, a concrete correlative measure, but this doesn't necessarily mean it is the causative agent. A favorite metaphor of mine is light shining through stained glass. The light is affected by the glass, it will always be changed by anything we do to the glass, but it is not created by the glass.
On the other hand, I'm not necessarily pushing for consciousness as the causative agent, either. I have too much respect for the empirical map to put a nonempirical map even on equal footing.
Basically, what I'm saying is what's been said many times before in other threads: ultimately all we really know, all that we directly, immediately experience are our perceptions of reality, not reality itself, however strong the inclination to assign that quality to the material world (paradigm bias?). And because consciousness is the only thing we do immediately experience, it would be a mistake, IMO, to dismiss it as meaningless or inconsequential to the study of reality, especially as we can't make a definitive statement about what or what is not the causative agent.
Again, I'm not necessarily trying to present a nonempirical map as equal to the empirical. But what is important, if we really want to understand the nature of reality, is that we "stand guard" against empiricist complacency.
No matter how much you learn, you can't know everything.
So if there is a spiritual or mystical part to consciousness, you can't prove or disprove it. So I'll wait until I die and find the actual answer as opposed to a bunch of people squabbling over what they think is the answer.
Same goes for politics.
You'd think in a forum of philosophy there'd be more understanding of how no one is really right in such matters.
Originally posted by LuminatusEmpirical science is not obligated to disprove anything. And a transcendent POV, at best, may inspire some food for thought.
So if there is a spiritual or mystical part to consciousness, you can't prove or disprove it.
So I'll wait until I die and find the actual answer as opposed to a bunch of people squabbling over what they think is the answer....As it turns out, though, if the empirical map is right, no one will ever know it. On the other hand, if it's wrong... 😖hifty:
In any event, KMC members do not squabble...ever.
You'd think in a forum of philosophy there'd be more understanding of how no one is really right in such matters.Understanding is for bleeding heart liberals. 🤘
Well I'm not saying science is obligated to prove or disprove anything. I'm saying some things aren't possible to know for absolute fact. Or do you think it's possible to know everything?
As for bleeding heart, hardly. I'm just not in the position to order you all to believe what I believe or die. So I have to be nice. 🙂
Originally posted by Mindship
Neither are you unimportant...at least, not as long as you can come up with descriptions like that balanced wave (that definitely gets added to my "Things I Wish I Had Said" list).
Thanks, but I got the idea from thinking about The Wave Analogy.
If i had a dollar for every Five dollar word used up this *****. I'd be halfway propelled to Jupiter by the quickening rate of Dollar bills firing out of my ass right now.
Consciousness always was and always will be. Asking where consciousness came from is asking where life came from. I think you cats need to start drinkin some more brews and going to a few more hockey games.
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
If i had a dollar for every Five dollar word used up this *****. I'd be halfway propelled to Jupiter by the quickening rate of Dollar bills firing out of my ass right now.Consciousness always was and always will be. Asking where consciousness came from is asking where life came from. I think you cats need to start drinkin some more brews and going to a few more hockey games.
🙄 Hockey sucks. 😛