Are You Conscious?

[Piggy]

Answer a question in the context in which it is asked. Don't pretend the context does not matter.

I should say the same to you.

All that rambling and it's still the case that when you are participating on this thread you are conscious.

 

[Mercutio]

I am focusing strictly on the OP.

Which mentions P-Zombies, yes.

And so far, nobody here has given any kind of support to the notion that any answer other than "Yes" to the question of "Are you conscious?" could possibly be accurate when asked of human beings participating in an online forum.

I have given a "no" answer many times, not just on this thread, and not just on an online forum. So, empirically, we know that at least one person will answer "no" to the question, and do so seriously.

When you ignore arguments, it is easy to assert that none have been presented.

And that's the bottom line.

Indeed.

 

[Mercutio]

I should say the same to you.

All that rambling and it's still the case that when you are participating on this thread you are conscious.

By some definitions. By others, I have been participating without the benefit of being conscious. By still others, I have no way of knowing whether I have been conscious or not while participating.

 

[Malerin]

Which mentions P-Zombies, yes.

I also mentioned "there". That can mean just about damn near anything!

 

[Malerin]

By some definitions. By others, I have been participating without the benefit of being conscious. By still others, I have no way of knowing whether I have been conscious or not while participating.

Can you provide us with a definition of consciousness where you would consider yourself an unconscious forum participant?

 

[Mercutio]

I also mentioned "there". That can mean just about damn near anything!

I suppose it depends on what your definition of "is" is.

 

[Mercutio]

Can you provide us with a definition of consciousness where you would consider yourself an unconscious forum participant?

Yes.

Actually, I thought I'd do you one better, and rather than simply create one, I'd find one that has been used in scholarly work.

"The presence of mental images and their use by an animal to regulate its behavior, provides a pragmatic working definition of consciousness" --D.R.Griffin, 'The Question of Animal Awareness', 1976 (italics from source)

By that definition, which I would think most people here would have no major problems with, I would consider myself unconscious. But, of course, I think it is the definition that is faulty.


There are some fun ones here, where I found that one. You might note the wide range in opinion, from Freud's "What is meant by consciousness we need not discuss - it is beyond all doubt" to Joynt's "Consciousness is like the Trinity; if it is explained so that you understand it, it hasn't been explained correctly."

I started reading the Wiki entry on consciousness, and thought better of it quickly, after disagreeing with it three times in just two sentences... so there are more definitions there, to which I would have to answer "no" if forced to use.

If I were at my office, I could have grabbed a few books off my shelf and thrown a few more definitions at you. It's not that difficult.

 

[Frank Newgent]

Mercutio may I quote from another thread?

The majority of car engines manufactured in the last decade are conscious.

You might be in the car but the keys aren't in the ignition.

 

[paximperium]

Please bother to think these things through before you post them.

Do you really intend to argue that you could be in a mental state which would allow you to post a reply to the OP on this forum while unconscious?

Yes. DEPENDING ON YOUR DEFINITION.

Specifically, a state which would allow you to accurately post anything other than "Yes" while not conscious?

Where does "accurately" have anything to do with conscious or are you using a different DEFINITION?

 

[paximperium]

Of course consciousness is complex. I have no intention of denying that.

Glad to hear that.

But your examples don't mean a hill of beans to the OP.

The fact still remains -- anyone capable of responding to the OP must be conscious, and therefore must answer "Yes".

And you base this on...what exactly?

It makes no difference whatsoever that not everyone responding will be in an identical conscious state.

So now we're using "consciousness" states as a different "goalpost"?

And your example about the sleepwalker is specious. Are you actually aware of any cases of people reading questions and responding to them while asleep?

My what a moving goalpost Piggy. There are sleepwalkers can drive, cook and have entire conversations while their state. There are a few rare cases of people writing emails while sleepwalking as well.

Are they conscious?

Like I said, I can give you medicines to make you forget the last 30minutes of activity you just did. Were you conscious during that time period?

When I'm such a state, I would reply NO.

Finally, your suspicions about Malerin's intentions, while perhaps accurate, are irrelevant to the question of whether a non-conscious person could actually answer the OP with "No".

Then I'm an exception. When I received medications pre-surgery, I told an anesthesiologist I was no longer conscious after he gave me the medication. I was still wide awake. We have a nice conversation about a great French restaurant that I just ate at yesterday...its just that I don't have any memory of that conversation at all.

 

[paximperium]

Of course there's a slew of things our brains are processing non-consciously all the time.

But again, that is utterly irrelevant to the OP.

The question is not "Are you conscious of everything your sensory organs pick up?"

Let's get back to the actual question at hand.

What was the question? Sorry someone refuses to tell me what he specifically asked.

Do you actually intend to claim that a person who is not conscious could log onto this forum, read the OP, and accurately answer "No"?

Yes. I could do this while very intoxicated and not remember a thing. Was I conscious? What was the definition you were using again?

 

[paximperium]

The OP does not require that consciousness be clear-cut.

It only asks whether or not people posting on this forum are, in some way, conscious.

Clearly, we all are.

Really, folks, this is getting ridiculous.

Yes it is getting ridiculous when YOU use a definition that I don't and Malerin uses his own whatever "gotcha" version. Words have meaning and I will not be lambasted into accepting or assuming a definition that is meaningless or that I disagree with.

YOU have never provided any definition that I or a host of others are willing to accept.

You want me to answer the OP using an assumed "'common" definition?

Sure. I'm awake.

 

[paximperium]

Mercutio may I quote from another thread?




You might be in the car but the keys aren't in the ignition.

Using Pixy's definition of conscious, it a perfectly valid statement. A large number of AI and cybernetic folk use that definition too. I think it is way too broad a definition but it has allowed them to approach AI research in some pretty advance ways and make progress in computation.

Why? Did you have some worthless arbitrary moving goalpost definition that his working definition just stepped on?

 

[Piggy]

I have given a "no" answer many times, not just on this thread, and not just on an online forum. So, empirically, we know that at least one person will answer "no" to the question, and do so seriously.

So you're claiming to seriously answer the question "Are you conscious?" with a "No".

When you're done with your fort, we can use the sofa cushions back.

 

[Piggy]

Yes. DEPENDING ON YOUR DEFINITION.

Which you don't care to supply.

 

[Piggy]

And you base this on...what exactly?

The question is, on what do you base your quibble?

You demand a definition, but you show no cause for doing so.

 

[Piggy]

So now we're using "consciousness" states as a different "goalpost"?

It's your goalpost, brother. I didn't bring it up.

 

[Piggy]

My what a moving goalpost Piggy. There are sleepwalkers can drive, cook and have entire conversations while their state. There are a few rare cases of people writing emails while sleepwalking as well.

Are they conscious?

Like I said, I can give you medicines to make you forget the last 30minutes of activity you just did. Were you conscious during that time period?

When I'm such a state, I would reply NO.

Like I said, your goalpost.

If you don't want to answer the question, then fine. If I were you, I don't reckon I would either.

But let's not drag it out so much, please.

Nothing you're talking about has anything to do with the OP or the issue at hand.

We're not talking about whether anyone can remember anything after the fact.

We're talking about whether someone can actually read a post online and accurately answer "No" to the question "Are you conscious?"

Whether or not they remember what they've done sometime later is immaterial.

This is getting more absurd by the moment.

But then again, hardcore denial always does.

 

[PixyMisa]

So you're claiming to seriously answer the question "Are you conscious?" with a "No".

Yes. Depending on the definition.

 

[Piggy]

I could do this while very intoxicated and not remember a thing.

Memory has nothing to do with it.

If you were sober enough to log on and post a coherent reply, then obviously you were conscious when you posted the reply.

If you had a heart attack and died five minutes later you wouldn't remember anything, either. That still doesn't mean that you were retroactively dead when you posted.

By the same token, failing to remember what you did does not mean that you were retroactively not conscious when you did it.

And anyway, are you claiming that you're drunk?