Explain consciousness to the layman.

[PixyMisa]

I think that's beyond our capability right now. Possibly in the future it will be public behavior. Subvocal speech is another area of interest, since much of what we call thinking involves talking to ourselves.

Yep.

I'm not saying that right now we can tell when you are mentally picturing your dog, just that we have tools that can give us insight into the processes involved, that it's not in principle an unapproachable problem.

 

[!Kaggen]

Minority Report I think?

 

[!Kaggen]

Yep.

I'm not saying that right now we can tell when you are mentally picturing your dog, just that we have tools that can give us insight into the processes involved, that it's not in principle an unapproachable problem.

Which principle?

 

[PixyMisa]

What?

 

[!Kaggen]

??

prin·ci·ple/'prins?p?l/
Noun:
1. A fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.

2. A rule or belief governing one's personal behavior.

 

[Belz...]

Certainly not. I have direct, certain knowledge of one instance of it.

I'm sure I can name a few times when you don't.

But you said it couldn't be said to exist.

I know there's a solution that relies on consciousness not existing, or being an illusion, which I regard as quite obviously wrong.

Why ?

 

[Belz...]

The moving needle is a potentially public event. Two independent observers could report their observations and the reliability of their observations could be determined.

And we can also determine if someone's conscious or not. Sounds objective to me.

 

[PixyMisa]

I would say that if something is undefined and has no reliable test for its detection, then that constitutes a hard problem.

Not in the sense that David Chalmers uses the term. What he means by hard problem is insoluble problem.

I know there's a solution that relies on consciousness not existing, or being an illusion, which I regard as quite obviously wrong.

Since the latter has been experimentally confirmed in several different ways, you would appear to find yourself at an impasse between your preconceptions and reality.

 

[PixyMisa]

??

Yes, what are you talking about? Do you know what the expression in principle means?

 

[!Kaggen]

Yes, what are you talking about? Do you know what the expression in principle means?

Yes, do you?

 

[Jeff Corey]

We are approching this faster than one might think: "Mind-reading research could give a voice to coma and stroke patients"

That was discussed quite a bit in another thread, and it's one of the things I was referring to as subvocal speech.

 

[Jeff Corey]

And we can also determine if someone's conscious or not. Sounds objective to me.

Definitely, but you'll find that the medical use of the term "conscious" is not what most people here were talking about.
If it were, we would have no quibbling about whether my dog or lab rats have "consciousness".

 

[PixyMisa]

Yes, do you?

Yes. So why the question?

 

[PixyMisa]

Definitely, but you'll find that the medical use of the term "conscious" is not what most people here were talking about.
If it were, we would have no quibbling about whether my dog or lab rats have "consciousness".

We have people here insisting that consciousness is undefined. Doesn't stop them talking about it, for some reason...

 

[yy2bggggs]

??

None of those. Look for "in principle" as an idiom.

 

[!Kaggen]

http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/INPRINCIPLE

http://idioms.yourdictionary.com/in-principle

What fundamentals, what theory, what essence?

Ethical, mathematical, chemical, biological, physical, economical.

 

[Complexity]

Yes, one wonders what the science of morality would say about public access to our inner life?

There is no 'science of morality'.

 

[!Kaggen]

There is no 'science of morality'.

At least on this point we agree.

 

[Mr. Scott]

Chopra sez (paraphrasing, I hope fairly, from memory):

Consciousness is a property of the universe. Our consciousness is us taking part in this universal consciousness, and it's all done with quantum mechanics, through its indeterminacy and spooky action at a distance.

Does anyone participating in the thread believe this?

 

[!Kaggen]

Chopra sez (paraphrasing, I hope fairly, from memory):

Consciousness is a property of the universe. Our consciousness is us taking part in this universal consciousness, and it's all done with quantum mechanics, through its indeterminacy and spooky action at a distance.

Does anyone participating in the thread believe this?

It's pseudoscience.