Consciousness: What is 'Awareness?'

Hokulele said:
I wonder why most people point to their chest when they are referring to themselves. Wouldn't AlBell's and Piggy's claim suggest that it would be more natural to point between the eyes?
Click to expand...

"Pull it!" Hokulele.
 
Piggy said:
I don't see any basis for arguing that it can't be done by a machine. After all, we're just organic machines when you get right down to it.

Whether it can be done by a Turing machine alone is a different question, though.
Click to expand...
No, it's exactly the same question. As explained in depth in the other thread, that position is mathematically and logically indefensible.

If it turns out that a mechanical component is required -- in other words, if being conscious is best viewed as something the body does, like blinking or sweating -- then the IP component will need to be combined with an electro-mechanical system in order for that function to be accomplished.
Click to expand...
Or - and this is the key - a simulation of such.

So, just as a robot that spraypaints cars needs a computer plus a mechanical arm to function, so a machine that does consciousness might need both types of components.
Click to expand...
No. It's actually impossible for any specific physical component beyond the Turing machine to be required.

And there's good reason to think this will turn out to be the case. For instance, conscious awareness is accompanied by a distinct physical sensation. Our sense of awareness is actually locatable -- behind our eyes, above our mouth.
Click to expand...
That's data. Once again, the Turing machine is all we need.

This physical sensation is absent from other non-conscious activities of the brain.
Click to expand...
Well, yeah. That's why you describe them as non-conscious.

As of yet, I don't know of any conception of how pure IP gets you that.
Click to expand...
Yes we do. And it has been given. And there are several excellent books you can read to learn more.
 
Piggy said:
... And there's good reason to think this will turn out to be the case. For instance, conscious awareness is accompanied by a distinct physical sensation. Our sense of awareness is actually locatable -- behind our eyes, above our mouth. ...
Click to expand...

Mercutio said:
...Failing to remember any introspective accounts of a "sense of awareness" that is localizable...
Click to expand...


Reminded me of something from an excerpted Alan Watts lecture called "I":

And as far as I can make it out, most people feel that they are something or other about halfway between the ears, and a little way behind the eyes, inside the head... that is what you call the "ego".
Click to expand...


Not really an introspective account: he's claiming that most people he's talked to, who, presumably, aren't trained in introspection, locate their "I" about where Piggy places the "sense of awareness", then arguing it's wrong to identify it as the "I". I don't know how rigorous his interviews were, whether he's just projecting a limited introspection onto others as a 'popular' view to argue against from his more 'enlightened' perspective; nor do I think Watts is an eminent source, more performer than academic; nevertheless, his remarks seem apt enough. From Alan Watts Theater (click flash anim-icon, bottom right).
 
Last edited:
Oh brother... okay. This highly defensive tone is killing me.

Mercutio:

I have this localized "sense" of self as well. It has the same location. I'm not going to make broad claims that everyone shares this percept, but I think you're misinterpreting something fundamental about it.

First and foremost, this is just a percept. It's no more extraordinary than saying that you see my avatar is bulging out.

As for your missing citations in literature, what can I say? But I dug something:
http://www.newscientist.com/article...your-head-leaving-the-body-behind.html?page=1

It's fairly related to OOB experiences. I'm not entirely sure if you can have an OOB without this sensation. (And no, I don't claim that people with an OOB experience actually float outside of their bodies, but I am convinced that they have an actual experience). Richard Feynman explored this particular localized sense of self himself... as discussed in Surely, You're Joking, Mr. Feynman, based on experiments on OOB he did using drugs and sensory deprivation tanks (later just sensory deprivation).

I find it fascinating. I've heard that the location is culturally based, but I haven't heard enough to know whether that's rumor or not (and I've heard a lot of junk), so all I can say is that I've no clue if it's true or not. As for how I knew to label this, well, I have this perceptual spatial sense of being located at a particular spot, so if someone uses a sequence of English words that sounds like it has something to do with that... that sounds like what they're describing.

The fact that you and Jeff can't relate to this is also fascinating, but to me isn't entirely surprising, as it might be to Piggy. After all, I can't see those damned 3-d ships in those stereograms myself for the life of me, and believe me I've tried!
Hokulele said:
I wonder why most people point to their chest when they are referring to themselves. Wouldn't AlBell's and Piggy's claim suggest that it would be more natural to point between the eyes?
Click to expand...
I can only answer this in a straightforward way. No. It's not more natural.
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
OK, I was just curious, having never had the sensation that the three of you describe. The closest would be being aware of my center of gravity when surfing or mountain biking, I think. I'm not entirely sure.
Click to expand...
Well I think those two are being quite emotional about it... how DARE you deny you have this!?!?

(Also, it's interesting that this affected my behavior)
 
Last edited:
yy2bggggs said:
Well I think those two are being quite emotional about it... how DARE you deny you have this!?!?
Click to expand...


Who the heck are you calling emotional!?!?!

But to the current point, I never really thought about it (where "I" am) in any situation without a specific context. I do think about my "core", as it is sometimes referred to in sports, and generally look at or point to my torso when I need a physical reference to "me". Hmm, when I try to find "me" in my head, I honestly don't feel anything there. I will have to read your linked article to see what that is all about.
 
I think that particular reference is a miss now that I read it again... doesn't describe the percept of a specific location. Still a good read.

ETA: A mention in passing:
http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=12
Everything we feel and experience (according to the neuro-materialist paradigm) requires brain structures and function that cause them – even the most basic components of our sense of self, such as the subjective feeling that we are inside our bodies, living behind our eyes.​
 
Last edited:
Mercutio said:
How, then, did you learn to label this feeling? I assume no one was able to point it out to you, nor point out the equivalent sense in him/herself. How, exactly, did you figure out that this was "sense of awareness" and not what Ichy is suggesting?
Click to expand...
Whether it be "awareness of awareness" or "flibble of bibble" the sense that Piggy (and now I) are mentioning is where the action is will remain. I suspect the same will be Piggy's opinion.

What I find most amazing is that others don't share this sensation.
 
UndercoverElephant said:
Part of the reason these debates rarely get anywhere is because the materialists don't want to allow this subjective definition of awareness or consciousness because they know that once it has been defined in this way the game is up.
Click to expand...
Not so, I am a Materialist and I have always held that consciousness only has a subjective, private ostensive definition.

I am not sure why this entails that the game is up.
 
Piggy said:
I don't see any basis for arguing that it can't be done by a machine. After all, we're just organic machines when you get right down to it.

Whether it can be done by a Turing machine alone is a different question, though.
Click to expand...
Depends what "it" is I suppose - any computation that the brain does can be done by a TM.

But it does not follow that a TM can produce this thing we call awareness or consciousness.
 
AlBell said:
Do you identify your locus for "awareness of awareness", or are you a p-zombie too?
Click to expand...


I have no idea what is meant by a locus for "awareness of awareness". As I mentioned in the conversation with yy2bgggs, I am aware of my core when surfing and mountain biking, as it is very important in both of those sports. I can make myself feel like there is an "I" just behind my eyes if I focus on something, but I can also make myself feel like there is an "I" back behind my ears if I listen carefully with my eyes closed. I do not have any feeling of a specific location for "me" as a default position other than my previous statement that I generally refer to my torso as "me" when someone asks me to point myself out. Any feeling of "me-ness" as a location seems to be related to whichever sense (extero or intero) I am using at the moment.

Apparently "awareness of awareness" is different for you and Piggy.

I also have no idea how a p-zombie fits into this, unless you are trying to tie this into qualia somehow.
 
AlBell said:
Whether it be "awareness of awareness" or "flibble of bibble" the sense that Piggy (and now I) are mentioning is where the action is will remain. I suspect the same will be Piggy's opinion.
Click to expand...
On what basis do you now put your two experiences in the same category? You noted earlier that you cannot know they are the same.
What I find most amazing is that others don't share this sensation.
Click to expand...
I don't find that amazing. What I find amazing is that you are so willing to see your own experience as human, and ours as zombie, rather than simply see variability among members of a population. (Besides, since p-zombies are by definition indistinguishable from humans, this difference could not be something that distinguishes the two.)

As I said, the aura manipulators sounded every bit as sure as you; I don't consider them abnormal, just wrong. I don't consider you either abnormal or wrong; I take it at your word that you feel something, and that you have attached a particular label to it. I'm just, out of curiosity, trying to figure out how you did so.
 
Yeah, I have a mental model of space around me, at all. Why would having a mental model of myself located somewhere in that mental model of space make me a more "real" person?
 
Think I'll take a break to mull over possible workable definitions of feelings while you guys battle this one out. I'm afraid I don't find the issue even interesting -- the 'perceived locus of awareness'. It's a projection based on the primary sensory input (behind the eyes when seeing, etc.) and cannot be a 'perception' perse because there are no receptors in the brain for feeling or any other sensory phenomenon.

Have fun with it and have a great Christmas and New Years.
 
Ichneumonwasp said:
Think I'll take a break to mull over possible workable definitions of feelings while you guys battle this one out. I'm afraid I don't find the issue even interesting -- the 'perceived locus of awareness'. It's a projection based on the primary sensory input (behind the eyes when seeing, etc.) and cannot be a 'perception' perse because there are no receptors in the brain for feeling or any other sensory phenomenon.

Have fun with it and have a great Christmas and New Years.
Click to expand...

There are glucoreceptors in our lateral and ventromedial nuclei of our hypothalamus that trigger and stop eating behavior.
So our sense of hunger obviously is located at the base of our brain, not right in back of the eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom