• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Consciousness

Mike Helland said:
Make a list of all the things that exist.

Most of them you can put into some type of category with other things.

Helium and oxygen for example. Liebniz and Newton. Dolphins and humans.

Most things fit into objective reality. They have measurable magnitudes like position and energy.

The subjective experience doesn't fit into that category.

It doesn't fit into any category.
Click to expand...

Because "subjective experience" is a nonsense phrase.
 
Mike Helland said:
Make a list of all the things that exist.

Most of them you can put into some type of category with other things.

Helium and oxygen for example. Liebniz and Newton. Dolphins and humans.

Most things fit into objective reality. They have measurable magnitudes like position and energy.

The subjective experience doesn't fit into that category.

It doesn't fit into any category.
Click to expand...
Why would experience find itself in a category with things?

I make a list. On it is a screwdriver, a cow, a cup of coffee, and velocity.

One of those items does not fit into a category as the others do. Have I found a special sort of being, or just made a bad list?
 
JoeMorgue said:
Because "subjective experience" is a nonsense phrase.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's a nonsense phrase, any more than, say, "history" or "time" are nonsense words. When a person exists and things happen in that person's life, subjective experience occurs. You can play with its name, and argue about how it works, but even if you conclude we're all machines, insofar as something in our mechanisms responds to something outside them, subjective experience can be said to happen.

It's what people do with it that's nonsense. "Speed" is real. You can know what it means, you can measure it, you can use it in formulas, you can write legislation about it. But you can't pick up a piece of it, because it's not a thing like a brick or a pair of scissors. Language blurs distinctions, so you can say it's a real thing, but an idea is not an entity.
 
bruto said:
Why would experience find itself in a category with things?

I make a list. On it is a screwdriver, a cow, a cup of coffee, and velocity.

One of those items does not fit into a category as the others do. Have I found a special sort of being, or just made a bad list?
Click to expand...

Screwdrivers, cows, and cups of coffee can have velocity.

They can be categorized that way.

Does mind have velocity?
 
Darat said:
You want a “why” question answered where there isn’t one.
Click to expand...

No. "Why?" suggests that there is meaning to it. I'm an atheist, and a pretty hard one at that. I don't believe, fundamentally, there is a meaning to anything.

I want to know how the Universe (via the brain) gives rise to subjective experience.

Saying that it shoudn't be, or doesn't need to be, explained - à la "Just accept this is the way it is and never question it" - strikes me as a rather religionist answer, and I find that distasteful.

Nothing else in the Universe is untouchable by investigation and experimentation, why should this be?

Darat said:
Nope it’s not a memory thing, apparently people can “imagine” things like a red cube or a blue ball even if they can’t recall the exact look of a blue ball they had when they were younger.
Click to expand...

I've also heard of people who don't have an inner voice.

https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/inner-voice.htm

Of course, knowing that some people don't have an inner voice and others don't have inner imaging makes me think about people who don't have either, if there are such people. They would probably just have unsymbolised thinking.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/pristine-inner-experience/201111/thinking-without-words
 
p0lka said:
You keep banging on about souls when I already said those labels have baggage and shouldn't be used in my opinion, come on.

There is a real internal experience. You seem to be not accepting that, or am I not understanding your position?

offtopic:
my body only experiences insulin when I choose it to.
Click to expand...

Such as what - the "internal narrator"? All "subjective" means when used in this discussion is an experience only perceived by one person, it is not some different or special kind of experience.
 
Darat said:
Such as what - the "internal narrator"? All "subjective" means when used in this discussion is an experience only perceived by one person, it is not some different or special kind of experience.
Click to expand...

What does objective mean, outside of reproducible observations by observers?
 
Minoosh said:
I didn't think that made you a p-zombie, just neuro atypical in a certain area - though I'm no expert on p-zombies. Did you learn to write using letter shapes? ...snip...
Click to expand...

Oh it does - in the very old HPC threads here you will read so much about the fact that we can experience "red" without any apparent external stimulus means that redness exists outside of space and time which means we are more than the processes in our skull (a tad colourful summary). A p-zombie wouldn't apparently have this magical experience of redness.

Couple of interesting facts - my handwriting has always been terrible, that despite being taught the good old fashioned ways from 3 years old right until my mid-teens. However, I am an OK artist, was a commercial artist for a little time.
Minoosh said:
How far does the absence of imagery go? Are you aware of any adaptations your brain has made, or are there any to make?
Click to expand...

Considering for 5 decades I didn't even know anyone had a mind's eye I've no idea! :)
 
Darat said:
Oh it does - in the very old HPC threads here you will read so much about the fact that we can experience "red" without any apparent external stimulus means that redness exists outside of space and time which means we are more than the processes in our skull (a tad colourful summary). A p-zombie wouldn't apparently have this magical experience of redness.
Click to expand...


Can you see red with your eyes open?

Seeing things with your eyes closed or not doesn't change what you see with your eyes open.

I don't see things when I close my eyes. Static I guess.
 
Mike Helland said:
Screwdrivers, cows, and cups of coffee can have velocity.

They can be categorized that way.

Does mind have velocity?
Click to expand...


Let's go to an athletic meet, let's watch the runners, can you show me the "run"?

You are confusing residual dualism in our folk language as an actual description of reality.


ETA:

Or as bruto put it:

bruto said:
...snip...

"Speed" is real. You can know what it means, you can measure it, you can use it in formulas, you can write legislation about it. But you can't pick up a piece of it, because it's not a thing like a brick or a pair of scissors. Language blurs distinctions, so you can say it's a real thing, but an idea is not an entity.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
Let's go to an athletic meet, let's watch the runners, can you show me the "run"?
Click to expand...

Sure.

I can watch the track. The starting line is clearly marked.

I have a stop watch. The lines are clearly marked.

When the starting gun occurs, I can start my watch, and record when they run by the markings on the track.

I can see their position, and determine their velocity, and acceleration.

Can I do any of those things with the mind?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom