Are You Conscious?

[Robin]

There is always the tacit assumption in these debates that when we say the word 'consciousness' we are all talking about the same thing.

But sometimes when I make the observation 'consciousness is observably complex', people reply 'no, consciousness itself is not complex, it is simple'.

Now the thing I refer to as 'consciousness' is complex and I can't begin to imagine what the simple thing is that others are referring to.

So how can we say that we know what consciousness is when we can't put it into words and can't agree even on what it is like?

 

[westprog]

The anti-Pixy

There is always the tacit assumption in these debates that when we say the word 'consciousness' we are all talking about the same thing.

But sometimes when I make the observation 'consciousness is observably complex', people reply 'no, consciousness itself is not complex, it is simple'.

Now the thing I refer to as 'consciousness' is complex and I can't begin to imagine what the simple thing is that others are referring to.

So how can we say that we know what consciousness is when we can't put it into words and can't agree even on what it is like?

Yes.

 

[westprog]

Are you telling me to leave or to concoct my own definition for your benefit ?

Oh, the second. I would never instruct anyone to go. It's easy enough to not read what they say - and someone else might be interested.

 

[LightningStrike]

Now the thing I refer to as 'consciousness' is complex and I can't begin to imagine what the simple thing is that others are referring to.

We are self conscious. Conscious of #1.
Look at the complication ; thought, worry, emotion. That is self.

So what is the experience of consciousness; It is not a mental thing.

 

[Robin]

Mathematics is like the anatomy of god.

I like that.

 

[Belz...]

Oh, the second. I would never instruct anyone to go. It's easy enough to not read what they say - and someone else might be interested.

Well, let me think...

Consciousness is a state of self-awareness exhibited by descrete things. A conscious thing is at least partially aware of its own functions, at least some of the time. Such a state is detectable mainly through behaviour, for example self-reporting.

Now, the exact mechanism through which this arises is unknown, hence this thread and others, but could be as simple as self-referential information processing, or as complex as immortal Christian souls. I'd bet it's more of the former than the latter.

 

[westprog]

Well, let me think...

Consciousness is a state of self-awareness exhibited by descrete things. A conscious thing is at least partially aware of its own functions, at least some of the time. Such a state is detectable mainly through behaviour, for example self-reporting.

Now, the exact mechanism through which this arises is unknown, hence this thread and others, but could be as simple as self-referential information processing, or as complex as immortal Christian souls. I'd bet it's more of the former than the latter.

The problem with that definition is that it's based around the word "awareness". Which is either consciousness or something similar to consciousness.

I find that a lot of definitions of consciousness are based around synonyms or near-synonyms.

 

[Belz...]

The problem with that definition is that it's based around the word "awareness". Which is either consciousness or something similar to consciousness.

I find that a lot of definitions of consciousness are based around synonyms or near-synonyms.

Then you don't understand what awareness means. Why doesn't that surprise me ?

 

[Dancing David]

...

BAM BAM BAM

Another senseless driveby posting.

 

[Dancing David]

Looks like this thread may be winding down. I'll ask now because I'm unsure what you decided when we discussed this earlier.

Do you believe that cancer, like pain, is behavior?

Hi Frank, the medical defintion was discussed very early on, I don't remember which derail was in process at that time. One of the doctors even posted anice little chart about it.

I did respond to most of your posts that you posted to me about my use of the term behavior, but I know these large threads are hard to follow. I have missed them.

Cancer itself would not be a behavior under the terms of 'private' behavior or 'public' behavior. The agglomeration of cells reffered to as a cancer would engage in many different behaviors, such as metastasis, vascularization, metabolism.

So no 'cancer' as a noun object is not a behavior, but as a noun object it may be capable of behaviors.

ETA:
Here it is, it was back on page three, a long time ago.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5426158&postcount=111

 

[Dancing David]

Of course my observable behavior is what you must use to determine if you accept I am conscious.

Do you also need observable-by-third-party behaviors to decide if you are conscious?

Same:same, we use the judgement of our private behaviors to determine taht we are conscious.

It is after all the application of a verbal cognition label in either case.

 

[westprog]

Then you don't understand what awareness means. Why doesn't that surprise me ?

In which case, it would be a worthy and charitable deed to define it for me.

Of course, one could easily fall into the Pixy trap of defining awareness in the form of a response to stimulus. A blind alley that leads to the conclusion that your microwave is conscious.

 

[AlBell]

Same:same, we use the judgement of our private behaviors to determine taht we are conscious.

It is after all the application of a verbal cognition label in either case.

I don't think that is correct. That is, I 'think' human -- and probably many other -- neural systems think without objective verbal cognition.

We are back to to the What is awareness? What is Consciousness? problem.

You to seem suggest awareness of awareness must be verbalized to be real.

 

[Belz...]

In which case, it would be a worthy and charitable deed to define it for me.

Of course, one could easily fall into the Pixy trap of defining awareness in the form of a response to stimulus. A blind alley that leads to the conclusion that your microwave is conscious.

And AGAIN you equate awareness and self-awareness. You have serious issues preventing you from understanding these things, apparently.

Awareness is the action of perceiving an event, allowing response to that event.

Notice that the concept of "self" isn't necessary here.

 

[AlBell]

And AGAIN you equate awareness and self-awareness. You have serious issues preventing you from understanding these things, apparently.

Awareness is the action of perceiving an event, allowing response to that event.

Notice that the concept of "self" isn't necessary here.

A few of us here seem to agree with those statements; I continue to prefer awareness of awareness rather than self-awareness but that is a minor quibble.

All life, and many non-biological devices display 'awareness' as we are using the word.

The problem is that dictionary definitions and usual usage of the terms obscure the matter: What is awareness? What is consciousness?.

 

[Belz...]

That's why I gave my own definition. I don't think there's a need to further define the terms used in the definition. So, as opposed to what Westprog said, it is quite definable.

 

[westprog]

And AGAIN you equate awareness and self-awareness. You have serious issues preventing you from understanding these things, apparently.

Awareness is the action of perceiving an event, allowing response to that event.

Notice that the concept of "self" isn't necessary here.

And now we have "awareness" defined in terms of "perception". (Defining self-awareness needs a definition of awareness first).

IMO this is going around in circles.

 

[AlBell]

And AGAIN you equate awareness and self-awareness. You have serious issues preventing you from understanding these things, apparently.

Awareness is the action of perceiving an event, allowing response to that event.

Notice that the concept of "self" isn't necessary here.

And now we have "awareness" defined in terms of "perception". (Defining self-awareness needs a definition of awareness first).

IMO this is going around in circles.

Yeah, I too missed the actual definition (that science can poke at).

 

[Belz...]

And now we have "awareness" defined in terms of "perception". (Defining self-awareness needs a definition of awareness first).

IMO this is going around in circles.

We're only going around in circles because you don't understand English. Look up those terms in a dictionary. You asked for a definition of consciousness and I went beyond the call of duty by giving you a definition of awareness as well. If you STILL don't understand the words and you need me to define "is", then you'll have to look somewhere else.

Your inability to define consciousness is your problem, not mine.

 

[Robin]

The best I can do in terms of a definition of consciousness is to separate out the behavioural and the ostensive components.

I can define consciousness as "comprehending information" where I think I can provide a non-circular behavioural definition of those terms.

The definition of "comprehend" would be in terms of the ability to make use of information in novel situations. I think that the definition could also be robust enough to encompass the consciousness of small animals, say a mouse. It can also help to distinguish it from, say, a sunflower turning towards the Sun.

The ostensive components are sensations, where I can only say, "like pain for example". Of course we can only induce or extrapolate that a mouse feels pain - nevertheless I don't think that is an unreasonable conclusion.

Naturally our sensations are part of the information that we comprehend, but I think that I can make the case that they are not just information.

I cannot define pain as a behaviour because - well what would that behavioural definition be?

We have to be careful about what we mean by the concept "comprehending" because it has a behavioural definition and also an ostensive definition.

For example sometimes in a maths lecture I would have the feeling about a concept "I comprehend that". But on trying to do the exercises afterwards I failed. So there is a sensation - "(apparent) comprehension" - and the actual ability to make use of information. They are two separate things.

We usually fail to realise the difference. For example certain drugs or meditation practices can induce a sensation of understanding, of answers to questions, of everything being made clear. But, on questioning, an individual who has these sensations is unable to say precisely what they understood, what questions were answered or what was made clear. The sensation of comprehension was induced without there being any subject matter for it.

I also think that most of the debate about whether a machine could have understanding, hinge around the confusion of these two meanings of "comprehend".

So I think there is a reasonable case to be made for separating out the behavioural and ostensive components of a definition of consciousness:

Behavioural : comprehending* information
Ostensive: Pain, for example.


* Obviously, comprehending is being used here in a purely behavioural sense.