In the brain.
Neurons. Lots of them.
Self-referential information processing.
This is exactly what I'm talking about.
Q: What makes a car run?
A: Metal parts. Lots of them. In the engine.
Now, that answer happens to be accurate. Incredibly imprecise, but accurate.
Yet if we didn't already know the real answer, we would have no way of judging this particular proposition because it does not distinguish between any action of metal parts which does
not cause a car to run, and the actions of metal parts which
do cause a car to run.
In other words, the only reason we can say that this answer is accurate but imprecise is because we do know much much more than that.
Your answer, however, raises all sorts of red flags.
So far, you've provided no evidence -- besides references to tomes and lectures which you provide no summary of -- to support your contention that IP
alone is a sufficient explanation.
(That word "alone" is the key.)
And on the face of it, the contention makes no sense, unless there's some sort of explanation to be had.
Consciousness is a bodily function. A behavior.
A unique one, yes, but still a bodily function.
And we know of no bodily function that can be accomplished in the way you're describing. So the exception has to be justified in some way.
So if you can provide a thumbnail of how this actually happens, then we can move on.
The reason we're stuck here is precisely because you simply continue to make this strange assertion with no evidence. ("Go read a 400 page book" or "Go take a college lecture" is not evidence.)
Let's take the example of some other bodily functions involving the brain: regulating body temperature and heartbeat.
A casual observer can't witness the brain doing these things in another person. But we can use measurement instruments to check the outcomes of the process, to track heartbeat and body temperature, and to peer inside the brain as best we can to see what's going on in there while this is happening.
Similarly, we can use instruments to see some of what the brain is doing when it does consciousness.
We know the brain is doing it. No doubt.
So here is a bodily function requiring brain activity.
As I've said, and you seem to agree, the firing of neurons leads to the firing of neurons.
You then jump to the conclusion that consciousness = the firing of neurons, but without any clear description of the precise process by which that allegedly happens.
For every other bodily function, in order for the overt behavior to take place -- blinking, shivering, regulating the heartbeat, regulating temperature, running, focusing light on the iris -- the firing of neurons has to be coupled with some sort of executive mechanism of another type.
"Running the logic" alone, with just enough mechanism to do that and no more, cannot accomplish any of these things by itself.
Now, we should not allow ourselves to make the mistake of thinking that consciousing is not a behavior, just because we haven't yet cracked the mechanism (which, apparently alone among bodily functions, appears to be handled entirely by the brain).
[Of course, this is discounting non-explanatory "explanations" consisting only of vague generalizations without any step-by-step mechanism spelled out, such as "SRIP" or "lots of neurons", which are not only hopelessly inadequate but also cannot distinguish between brain functions that are not involved in the function of consciousness and those which are --
if it can't do that, it's not an explanation of the process.]
Clearly, Sofia is a bodily function. When I'm dreaming, it's operating. When I stop dreaming, it shuts off. When I wake up, it starts again.
It's something our bodies do.
Meanwhile, all this time, the brain is always engaged in SRIP, neurons are always firing.
So clearly, irrefutably,
pointing to SRIP and the firing of neurons by itself is not an explanation of the mechanism of consciousness because those things are going on whether the body is doing consciousness or not.
QED that is an insufficient explanation.
The question remains: what mechanism actually instantiates the behavior? What is the analog to the various mechanisms, above and beyond the classic chain-reaction firing of neurons, to the mechanisms that focus light on the retina, make an arm move, slow the heart down, raise goosebumps, and keep our body temp in a safe range?
If you ignore that mechanism -- whatever it may turn out to be -- then you require a ghost in the machine, unless you can provide a clear, step-by-step explanation of exactly what is going on (and where) in the generation of Sofia.
