Consciousness: What is 'Awareness?'

[Maia]

You're paying attention. (Whatever attention means.) QUOTE]

Okay, this one I can address... "paying attention" is a complex executive process mediated mostly through the prefrontal lobes, although some recent evidence indicates that there's also some temporal lobe processing involved. Personally, I find it to be defined more by its negative quality. In other words, being able to "pay attention" feels like something that should be the default state. Not being able to "pay attention" feels horribly and hideously wrong and jangly and not-right and something-very-fundamental-is-not-working and not being able to "pay attention" is a symptom.

Ritalin helps a lot. (Now entering a Zen State...) Nobody really knows why. Amphetamines and their derivatives certainly don't have that effect in normal brains. Again, this is a good example of how I think we can best learn about consciousness by studying specific examples of pathology (and again, this is something which Dennett et al do NOT do...)

ETA: if you were aware of everything, you'd go absolutely crazy from nervous exhaustion. That's part of what an ADHD brain tries to do. It's horrible. It keeps trying to take in all incoming information and process it.

 

[Apathia]

No it isn't. It's referential information processing. Or representational, if you prefer. Awareness is the ability to construct and manipulate symbolic representations.

And as it is, I'm with you on this point.
What I agree with Geoff on is the subjective nature of the subject, not magic.

I apologize for my moment of mischief.

BTW, did you ever get around to reading Hofstadter's I Am A Strange Loop?

 

[Apathia]

I like you Apathia, but that is thoroughly unhelpful and obviously contentious.

You're right. It was a moment of snarkiness.
I apologize to you and the other participants in this thread, as I did to PixyMisa above.

(Not that this is an excuse, but I was watching an episode of House MD just before making that post. You could say I was influenced by bad company.)

 

[PixyMisa]

Ritalin helps a lot. (Now entering a Zen State...) Nobody really knows why. Amphetamines and their derivatives certainly don't have that effect in normal brains. Again, this is a good example of how I think we can best learn about consciousness by studying specific examples of pathology (and again, this is something which Dennett et al do NOT do...)

ETA: if you were aware of everything, you'd go absolutely crazy from nervous exhaustion. That's part of what an ADHD brain tries to do. It's horrible. It keeps trying to take in all incoming information and process it.

Yes, like the examples of change blindness and attentional blindness, the way it works is illuminated by what happens when it fails. That's why abnormal psychology is so fascinating. (At least, for me.)

And it's why engineers spend so much time studying failure modes.

 

[PixyMisa]

And as it is, I'm with you on this point.
What I agree with Geoff on is the subjective nature of the subject, not magic.

I apologize for my moment of mischief.

No worries. I don't deny the subjective, just that it's magical.

BTW, did you ever get around to reading Hofstadter's I Am A Strange Loop?

Alas, no. I was run over by a bus and killed.

...

Okay, I've been busy.

 

[!Kaggen]

How about exploring the nature of awareness in relationship to our experience of space and time?

So first lets tackle awareness of the present (real time and space).

When we "think about" something, it is in a context completely unrelated to the present we physically occupy.

In fact I cannot see how we can "think about" something which we are experiencing in the present at all.

We can only "think about" the past or the future. Never the present .

When we think about something we would certainly have the impression of "awareness".

What is it that we are "aware of" when we "think about" something?

It certainly is not "the something" we are "thinking about" since it does not even need to be present.

It must be "the thoughts" about something.

If we want to avoid this road towards solipsism, lets continue..

It would appear that "thinking about" brings us very few answers as to what is awareness of the present.

Perhaps we can then tackle "figuration" (defined as the act of providing a figure/symbolic representation) which occurs when we recognize something in our environment.

The first important question is, is this a conscious or unconscious process?

We can play soccer in the present without being conscious of the roundness of the soccer ball. But on reflection we will realize that it is this roundness which we recognize as a property of a soccer ball when the ball goes flat or someone replaces it with a rugby ball.

We therefore do interact with the world in the present based on our "figuration" thereof. Is this what we mean by awareness of the present? When we interact with it?

If figuration is an unconscious process then we would doubtfully call it awareness of the present. But as some have noted we might define this awareness in retrospect as the opposite of non-awareness (see soccer ball example above). But this is just saying that something that happens sometimes is different than something that never happens. But this does not enlighten us at all as to our awareness of the present.

However if figuration is a conscious process then this would be an awareness of the present, right?

The question then is how does figuration come about and how can it become a conscious process?

"Thinking about" something informs the figure/symbols we use in the figuration process, but still does not make figuration a conscious process.
You do not need to be conscious of the geometry of what a circle/sphere/roundness is to play with a soccer ball and realize when it is a rugby ball.

It is thinking about our thinking which makes us aware of "our" contribution to reality in the figuration process. This is called self-awareness or consciousness.

When we have mastered this we can happily move on to interacting consciously with the world and even change it into the future by directing our figuration with our "I". This is called self-consciousness.

 

[UndercoverElephant]

I'm not. He just said that awareness is magic and he won't accept any definition that takes his magic away.

You can always rely on PixyMisa to provide a textbook example of precisely what I am talking about. I supplied a clear, articulate and essentially unrefutable argument about how we have to define "awareness", and why. The response from the resident knee-jerk (= "total abscence of critical thinking") materialist consisted of a blatant strawman ("he just said it is magic") followed by an accusation the whole argument is a psychological crutch.

We have come full circle. We have people who claim to represent science and rationalism behaving like brainwashed religious people, and on the whole we have a board full of others who do not have the courage to speak out against the nonsense, because they aren't sure how to respond either.

 

[kellyb]

All I have to add is an anecdote and my speculation.

I'm epileptic, and this one time I was "coming to" from a gran mal, and was fading from "nothingness" to perception, and was hearing someone saying "my tongue is numb." Over the course of a few minutes (or maybe 10 seconds, I dunno), I realised MY tongue was totally numb. Then I realised the voice was my own. I was the one saying it. Then I was seeing where I was, and noticing that I was talking to a nurse. I had no idea what about. She apparently noticed a new look on my face and asked me "Are you really here now?" and I said "yes".

There was another person in the room, too. Someone I didn't recognise, but seemed to be an old, frail, non-threatening female. Over the course of 30 minutes or so, I realised this person was my mom.
The whole thing was really, really bizarre. My mom says I was semi-incoherently "talking to" the nurse for quite a while before I really came to. She says I was frustrating the nurse because all I would say to her questions about allergies and whatnot was "my tongue is numb".

So...my speculation...
I think consciousness is multi-layered. It's a matter of perception. If you perceive nothing you're fully unconscious, if you're "awake" you're fully conscious, and between those two extremes is a bunch of grey area, where it's a scale. How one defines it depends simply upon where one wants to draw their line in the sand.

 

[PixyMisa]

You can always rely on PixyMisa to provide a textbook example of precisely what I am talking about. I supplied a clear, articulate and essentially unrefutable argument about how we have to define "awareness", and why.

No, you provided a plate of waffles.

You said:

The car alarm can respond to external stimuli, but is not aware that anything is going on.

All we have is you assertion that we must define awareness this way.

Why?

What actual difference is there between a car alarm and a human perception?

What actual difference, in terms of some sort of response, behaviour or activity?

In terms of something coherently defined?

In terms of something real?

The response from the resident knee-jerk (= "total abscence of critical thinking") materialist consisted of a blatant strawman ("he just said it is magic") followed by an accusation the whole argument is a psychological crutch.

Well, that is in fact your argument, and that does at least appear to me to be the reason behind your argument. The reason is irrelevant, but the argument remains. You say:

What is certainly not going to fly is any attempt to define awareness in terms of some sort of response, behaviour or activity.

That excludes the entire physical Universe, which leaves us with magic. You insisted on it. I didn't put the requirement for magic into your position, you did.

You have constructed your position such that you won't be satisfied with any explanation that has any basis in reality. That's your problem, and no-one else's.

We have come full circle. We have people who claim to represent science and rationalism behaving like brainwashed religious people, and on the whole we have a board full of others who do not have the courage to speak out against the nonsense, because they aren't sure how to respond either.

No. None of that is true. None of it is true at all.

It's been demonstrated time and again that the people here who are interested in science and rational thinking do disagree and do argue their points - and often enough come to some agreement out of that.

You, however, eliminate the entire physical Universe from consideration as a possible cause. There is no position that is less rational than that.

Except possibly !Kaggen's post above, which is just an cavalcade of equivocation and special pleading.

 

[PixyMisa]

All I have to add is an anecdote and my speculation.

I'm epileptic, and this one time I was "coming to" from a gran mal, and was fading from "nothingness" to perception, and was hearing someone saying "my tongue is numb." Over the course of a few minutes (or maybe 10 seconds, I dunno), I realised MY tongue was totally numb. Then I realised the voice was my own. I was the one saying it. Then I was seeing where I was, and noticing that I was talking to a nurse. I had no idea what about. She apparently noticed a new look on my face and asked me "Are you really here now?" and I said "yes".

There was another person in the room, too. Someone I didn't recognise, but seemed to be an old, frail, non-threatening female. Over the course of 30 minutes or so, I realised this person was my mom.
The whole thing was really, really bizarre. My mom says I was semi-incoherently "talking to" the nurse for quite a while before I really came to. She says I was frustrating the nurse because all I would say to her questions about allergies and whatnot was "my tongue is numb".

So...my speculation...
I think consciousness is multi-layered. It's a matter of perception. If you perceive nothing you're fully unconscious, if you're "awake" you're fully conscious, and between those two extremes is a bunch of grey area, where it's a scale. How one defines it depends simply upon where one wants to draw their line in the sand.

Thanks kellyb. Yes, not only is it not a simple on/off condition, it's made up of many components, so that you can lose some faculties that we normally consider an essential part of the conscious mind while retaining others, whether through a seizure as in your cause, or physical damage, or drugs, or just naturally.

In your case, you knew that your tongue was numb, and you were able to express this, so your speech center was on line, but you didn't notice people talking to you. Maybe Maia knows more about how that can happen.

Again, this is pointing out that awareness is the opposite of what... certain posters here insist it must be. It's a physical process, and subject to physical failures.

 

[UndercoverElephant]

******** ******** [I can't think] ********, insult, NO!, ********, ********...

Did somebody fart?

This message is hidden because PixyMisa is on your ignore list.

Hmmm. Fresh air.

With friends like Pixymisa, science and rationalism do not need enemies. He does far more damage to the reputation of those things than any creationist could, because he really believes he is standing up for them. His posts, however, as any person who spends any time on this board surely already knows, consist almost entirely of stuff which has come out of his anus. They provide ample evidence of what can be produced even by quite simple neural structures like those of slugs and snails.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

ETA: if you were aware of everything, you'd go absolutely crazy from nervous exhaustion. That's part of what an ADHD brain tries to do. It's horrible. It keeps trying to take in all incoming information and process it.

This part you said caught my attention as that is what I feels happens whenever I have taken too much pot (specifically the two occasions in which I ate it, and it was too much for my organism). It seemed as if the "bad trip" was basically the fact that I was becoming overwhelmed by the information processing, which was becoming not only way too intense but it was echoing on itself ad infinitum. Therefore, you end up feeling like you're going crazy. ANY thought or sensation becomes intensified because of an extreme attention your conscious is putting on it, and I guess part of what creates the "echo effect" is the fact that the only thing that comes after paying way too much attention to something is re-creating the experience again.

 

[!Kaggen]

This part you said caught my attention as that is what I feels happens whenever I have taken too much pot (specifically the two occasions in which I ate it, and it was too much for my organism). It seemed as if the "bad trip" was basically the fact that I was becoming overwhelmed by the information processing, which was becoming not only way too intense but it was echoing on itself ad infinitum. Therefore, you end up feeling like you're going crazy. ANY thought or sensation becomes intensified because of an extreme attention your conscious is putting on it, and I guess part of what creates the "echo effect" is the fact that the only thing that comes after paying way too much attention to something is re-creating the experience again.

So Pixy what is the cause of the "excess" consciousness/awareness Ron is talking about then?
Too little RAM or lets kill a few brain cells?

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

Did somebody fart?



Hmmm. Fresh air.

With friends like Pixymisa, science and rationalism do not need enemies. He does far more damage to the reputation of those things than any creationist could, because he really believes he is standing up for them. His posts, however, as any person who spends any time on this board surely already knows, consist almost entirely of stuff which has come out of his anus. They provide ample evidence of what can be produced even by quite simple neural structures like those of slugs and snails.

Please leave the personal attacks elsewhere. I'm not interested in them and I doubt others are either.

Your earlier definition of awareness is the common dictionary definition. That is not what I am interested in. Anyone can look up a word in a dictionary. What I am interested in is exploring what those words and ideas mean. What does it mean to say that we know something is going on? I think -- at least I hope -- that everyone here realizes that awareness means something more than bare stimulus-response. So, what do the words "knowing that something is going on" mean? What are the components of that process? How do we break that down?

 

[Gate2501]

I don't think that we will ever have a clean definition for awareness, it requires a wiki.

UCE, what would you like scientists who wish to study awareness to do? I don't think that anyone, even pixy, would deny that awareness is experienced subjectively. What you have to consider, is that whatever gives rise to that experience is also happening objectively in the brain. Why should we not try to figure out what exactly happens in the brain that gives rise to that experience? Why should we not try to reproduce that outside of the brain? What would make this fundamentally impossible??? I fear that you would want scientists to just "stop looking into it", or use techniques which we will learn nothing useful from, that have been demonstrated for thousands of years to not produce results(philosophy/metaphysics).

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

All I have to add is an anecdote and my speculation.

I'm epileptic, and this one time I was "coming to" from a gran mal, and was fading from "nothingness" to perception, and was hearing someone saying "my tongue is numb." Over the course of a few minutes (or maybe 10 seconds, I dunno), I realised MY tongue was totally numb. Then I realised the voice was my own. I was the one saying it. Then I was seeing where I was, and noticing that I was talking to a nurse. I had no idea what about. She apparently noticed a new look on my face and asked me "Are you really here now?" and I said "yes".

There was another person in the room, too. Someone I didn't recognise, but seemed to be an old, frail, non-threatening female. Over the course of 30 minutes or so, I realised this person was my mom.
The whole thing was really, really bizarre. My mom says I was semi-incoherently "talking to" the nurse for quite a while before I really came to. She says I was frustrating the nurse because all I would say to her questions about allergies and whatnot was "my tongue is numb".

So...my speculation...
I think consciousness is multi-layered. It's a matter of perception. If you perceive nothing you're fully unconscious, if you're "awake" you're fully conscious, and between those two extremes is a bunch of grey area, where it's a scale. How one defines it depends simply upon where one wants to draw their line in the sand.

Yes, excellent. Consciousness -- as Dancing David began to outline in the other thread -- is clearly multi-layered. In fact, there are several different systems that contribute to it and injury to each provide different forms of impairments of consciousness.

One of the issues we need to deal with -- and this was part of my point in starting this thread -- is that, like with morality and its discussions, we are stuck with single words that actually stand in for a variety of different processes. Consciousness is not one thing (it isn't a thing anyway, it is a process and should be a verb) and neither is awareness (though the fact that these are individual words gives us the illusion that they are). I think awareness is a garbage term that covers a myriad of processes that probably have some underlying commonalities -- such as reverberating neuronal relay loops across large areas of the brain. But there are levels of "awake" that depend on brainstem level activity, others that depend on cortico-thalamic relays, others that depend on relays centered in the cingulate gyrus.

 

[!Kaggen]

Consciousness is not one thing (it isn't a thing anyway, it is a process and should be a verb) and neither is awareness (though the fact that these are individual words gives us the illusion that they are).

This process called awareness or consciousness you refer to as verbs are then subject to time, correct? So when do these processese start and end? When are you aware or not? When are you conscious or not?

I think awareness is a garbage term that covers a myriad of processes that probably have some underlying commonalities -- such as reverberating neuronal relay loops across large areas of the brain. But there are levels of "awake" that depend on brainstem level activity, others that depend on cortico-thalamic relays, others that depend on relays centered in the cingulate gyrus.

It is all very well to speculate about the biology of awareness/consciousness, but is that what we mean when we say, I am conscious/aware, or are you just reducing awareness/consciousness to defined and manipulable biological entities because of your need for a physical explanation and intervention ?

 

[UndercoverElephant]

Your earlier definition of awareness is the common dictionary definition. That is not what I am interested in. Anyone can look up a word in a dictionary. What I am interested in is exploring what those words and ideas mean.

But I didn't look it up in a dictionary. I just told you what I believed that word means to me.

What does it mean to say that we know something is going on? I think -- at least I hope -- that everyone here realizes that awareness means something more than bare stimulus-response.

When I say "knows something in going on", I specifically did not mean "is capable of responding to an external stimulus".

So, what do the words "knowing that something is going on" mean? What are the components of that process? How do we break that down?

I'm not convinced we are talking about a "process" at all, nor that it can be broken down. The underlying process could be happening without any awareness. When we say "awareness" or "consciousness" we are refering to an internal awareness of neural processes, not the processes themselves.

"Awareness" is the difference between a car alarm and a brain.

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

This process called awareness or consciousness you refer to as verbs are then subject to time, correct? So when do these processese start and end? When are you aware or not? When are you conscious or not?

That is what is at issue. What is awareness? We can always provide simple answers to such questions -- I am conscious from the time I arise from dreamless sleep until I return to that state (though it is very unclear that any bit of sleep is dreamless).

It is all very well to speculate about the biology of awareness/consciousness, but is that what we mean when we say, I am conscious/aware, or are you just reducing awareness/consciousness to defined and manipulable biological entities because of your need for a physical explanation and intervention ?

Why do you suppose I have a "need" for a physical explanation? I am asking for surcease from the merry-go-round of equivocation where these words live in current philosophical discourse.

 

[Dancing David]

To re-iterate from another thread: I have no answer to this question.

Whatever we mean by 'awareness' it seems that it must include attention. But is attention alone necessary or does awareness include other aspects?

I would like to avoid dualism from the outset, so we will need to be careful not to define awareness in terms of a homonculus since to do so would be to lose the game from the outset.

We will obviously need to define attention, but what else is a necessary component of awareness? Is awareness always awareness of something? Need we include intentionality to the notion of awareness?

I think we do. What do others think?

I think that the common usage is that 'awareness' is a recognition of somesort of perceptions, in other words another layer that recognises the perceptions. say the verbal cognition "I am hot."