Support NeoGAF

[meadowrag]

Why is this a requirement?

It's merely an example intended to demonstrate a level of complexity that I feel we will never be able to match by an outsider physically "influencing chemical reactions in the brain". It would be a task on the level of attempting to order the universe, not to mention the fact that the influencer would need to have a conceptualization of what they intended to produce through influence in the first place.
That specifically isn't a requirement, there are others I could substitute if you'd like.

... do you know how many musicians in our modern era were 'inspired' with the use of drugs?

Of all the arguments and emotional appeals against the physical nature of the mind/brain, this is among the poorer ones.

I have no idea why inspired drug usage would be in contention with what I said. The experience of a drug is subjective, it isn't like "drugs=production of art". I'm not arguing against the physical nature of the mind/brain. It's obvious to anyone that there is a physical component, and I even directly stated that consciousness can be influenced through physical means. I'm merely stating that the end product of consciousness is either A) not entirely physical, or B) far too complex for us to deem it entirely physical at this time.

Consciousness is non-physical similar to the way that language, maths or many other abstract concepts are non-physical.

Their existence is utterly dependent and reliant on the physical material domain - but they can exist within their own conceptual bubbles, paring down much of the 'noise of reality' (all the matter/energy interactions that occur in the material universe that bear no meaning towards the function of those abstract concepts).

Essentially this, except I believe existence is holistic rather than one level being utterly dependant upon another, interdependance

 

[Daft_Cat]

Why are you determining consciousness as a non-physical phenomenon? Everything we know about that brain indicates it works through a complex system of chemical interactions in the 'physical' universe.

And you have now essentially opened up the can of worms that is the mind-body problem.

 

[rdrr gnr]

And you have now essentially opened up the can of worms that is the mind-body problem.

There is no mind-body problem.

I have a question for people in here.

Do you believe consciousness dies with you at death? If not, why or where does "it" go?

 

[Zaptruder]

Essentially this, except I believe existence is holistic rather than one level being utterly dependant upon another, interdependance

There's a pretty profound difference between the holistic interaction dualism that you subscribe to and material dependent dualism that I describe.

The latter is simply an abstraction that helps us better understand the manner in which the universe works, while the former is a statement about how the universe works that is incongruent with the collected data and observations produced by science.

 

[Daft_Cat]

There is no mind-body problem.

What? You feel it's been satisfied or something? I agree partially. I think we have a couple very persuasive solutions..but to say the problem's gone away or is in any way close to settled is flat out incorrect.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Consciousness is non-physical similar to the way that language, maths or many other abstract concepts are non-physical.

Their existence is utterly dependent and reliant on the physical material domain - but they can exist within their own conceptual bubbles, paring down much of the 'noise of reality' (all the matter/energy interactions that occur in the material universe that bear no meaning towards the function of those abstract concepts).

This makes absolutely no sense. An abstract is dependent and reliant (these two words mean the same ting ya know...) on the physical material domain (what is that supposed to mean?!).

Its the opposite abstract concepts have no dependency on physicality while concrete concepts do.

What? You feel it's been satisfied or something? I agree partially. I think we have a couple very persuasive solutions..but to say the problem's gone away or is in any way close to settled is flat out incorrect.

Who exactly does it pose a problem to?

 

[Orayn]

This makes absolutely no sense. An abstract is dependent and reliant (these two words mean the same ting ya know...) on the physical material domain (what is that supposed to mean?!).

Its the opposite abstract concepts have no dependency on physicality while concrete concepts do.

EDIT: Sorry, misunderstood what you were getting at with the comments about "abstract."

 

[ecurbj]

There are numerous subsets of civilization that reject the notion of free will, either in recognition of the divine authority of God, or of a hyer-materialist universe where everything is causally interlinked.
One of the only personal tenets I've come to develop is that the concept of free will, of being in any position where control is exerted by an isolated sense of self awareness, is a total fabrication of a mind which as of yet remains ignorant to the fundamental code of existence.
To me it seems impossible.

Which god? Krishna, Judeo-Christian, Buddha, Zeus, Thor, Ra? Or any of the gods we humans have made up.

 

[umop_3pisdn]

This makes absolutely no sense. An abstract is dependent and reliant (these two words mean the same ting ya know...) on the physical material domain (what is that supposed to mean?!).

Its the opposite abstract concepts have no dependency on physicality while concrete concepts do.

Yeah, I thought the whole point of qualia is that it's categorically distinct from quantifiable phenomenon.

 

[Zaptruder]

This makes absolutely no sense. An abstract is dependent and reliant (these two words mean the same ting ya know...) on the physical material domain (what is that supposed to mean?!).

Its the opposite abstract concepts have no dependency on physicality while concrete concepts do.

When you put it this way, it's a pretty poorly worded statement. I'll get back to you once I've fleshed it out more.

Point I was trying to get across though is that consciousness doesn't exist in it's own special plane of reality that can nonetheless influence our material universe - as is the common conception of dualistic thinking.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Why did you put existence in quotation marks?

 

[The Technomancer]

When you put it this way, it's a pretty poorly worded statement. I'll get back to you once I've fleshed it out more.

Point I was trying to get across though is that consciousness doesn't exist in it's own special plane of reality that can nonetheless influence our material universe - as is the common conception of dualistic thinking.

Now that is more concisely put, and something I agree with.

 

[Wool]

Anybody ever listen to the GTA IV radio station, "The Journey"? Here's a link

The DJ has some great existential quotes:
"Good afternoon, history is ending. Who knows when."
"Thank God for the digital age, now you don't need friends, now you don't need God. You can just have computers talk to you instead. We are better at pretending to like you."
"The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Slowly, you being to realize you are completely irrelevant."

 

[meadowrag]

Which god? Krishna, Judeo-Christian, Buddha, Zeus, Thor, Ra? Or any of the gods we humans have made up.

I don't know, you'll have to ask them, I'm not an expert in religious philosophy. My point was that the concept of free will isn't a universal trait of civilization, not an attempt to declare the existence of God. Great job sliding in the "gods we humans have made up" part though, very profound.

 

[DarkKyo]

Why did you put existence in quotation marks?

Because he questions its validity. He is merely paraphrasing someone else recognizing the phenomenon.

 

[mugwhump]

So how come shit exists
Where did all dat shit come from?

Consciousness is pretty neat. "We are a way for the cosmos to know itself," and all that fun business.

Shit, man.

 

[rdrr gnr]

What? You feel it's been satisfied or something? I agree partially. I think we have a couple very persuasive solutions..but to say the problem's gone away or is in any way close to settled is flat out incorrect.

I know that neuroscience is still an emerging field, especially when to comes to issues traditionally relegated to philosophy. But everything from phenomena like the sensed-presence effect, out-of-body experiences, near-death experiences, and even the basis for our morality -- would have had some "metaphysical" or at least non-physical explanation 100 years ago. We have moved past that. There is literally mountains of evidence and even distinct sub-fields of neuroscience that cover those topics. Your memories, your identity, your sense of self, can all be permanently destroyed or altered by indirect chemical reactions or by direct physical atrophy. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that consciousness does not die with you at death. Nor is there evidence to suggest that consciousness functions outside of our material brains. All of the relevant science points to the notion that: we are not in bodies, we are bodies. Of course, we don't have a clear basis for what consciousness is yet, but I choose to refrain from immediately attributing it to the non-physical or the non-scientific as evidenced by modern revelations in the field. There is no reason to believe that the basis for consciousness cannot have a scientific explanation other than its current shortcoming.

Then again. We could all just be in the Matrix.

 

[Chowfahn]

This is what fascinates me most in existence: the peculiar necessity of imagining what is, in fact, real.

I agree with this author. That we exist is in itself fascinating; that we have to simulate it all and trick our brains into decoding the input and remembering memories is what's mind blowing to me. Nothing exists outside your own head, maaannnnn!

Also related- one of my favorite sci-fi novels of all time, Peter Watts' Blindsight, goes into this topic. It delves into the nature and purpose of sentience, while the characters battle aliens. It's wicked cool, and available for free online!

 

[umop_3pisdn]

I agree with this author. That we exist is in itself fascinating; that we have to simulate it all and trick our brains into decoding this input to actually experience it is what's mind blowing to me. Nothing exists outside your own head, maaannnnn!

I think it's pointless to assert anything at all on the matter (that nothing exists outside of our heads). It's not that I'm partial to the opposing side of the argument, it just assumes knowledge about something that is impossible to have knowledge of. Phenomenon (meaning subjectivity) is just probably the only thing we can say that we 'know' epistemologically.

 

[Chowfahn]

I think it's pointless to assert anything at all on the matter (that nothing exists outside of our heads). It's not that I'm partial to the opposing side of the argument, it just assumes knowledge about something that is impossible to have knowledge of. Phenomenon (meaning subjectivity) is just probably the only thing we can say that we 'know' epistemologically.

Well, yes, I agree that it's pointless to argue that nothing at all exists outside your own mind. I got carried away a little bit. Things definitely exist! Or if they don't, then it's pointless for me to be arguing about it with a fake Internet guy who is also fake.

What I meant before is that your whole personality - everything that makes you you - is just a bunch of data and routines on a naturally-occurring meat computer. If you want to, you can alter someone's internal wiring and give them false memories or disorders and there's nothing they can do about it. Or you can do something more natural like lie to yourself in order to change your own personal reality.

The Universe even existing at all is really cool. I love to learn more about the Big Bang and theoretical physics and stuff. But the fact that we humans are so compassionate, insane, and delicate just astounds me.

Alright I'm gonna let others speak now. 'Night, fellas.

 

[Ether_Snake]

If a grain of sand could think, it would be as amazed as you are of its own existence.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

I just can't wait until science fully knows most of this stuff.

Its very interesting.

 

[DarkKyo]

Yep. This. The fact that people still think of consciousness as non-physical or as being like a spirit or soul in this day and age with all that science has shown us about the brain is kind of depressing.

It's not hard to understand or sympathize with why people see it that way. It's not that depressing, bro.

 

[Trent Strong]

It's not hard to understand or sympathize with why people see it that way. It's not that depressing, bro.

Maybe you're right.

Anybody ever listen to the GTA IV radio station, "The Journey"? Here's a link

The DJ has some great existential quotes:
"Good afternoon, history is ending. Who knows when."
"Thank God for the digital age, now you don't need friends, now you don't need God. You can just have computers talk to you instead. We are better at pretending to like you."
"The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Slowly, you being to realize you are completely irrelevant."

That radio station was great. My favorite quote from the Journey was: "Music that makes you realize the one eternal truth... I'm fucked."

 

[BocoDragon]

Always laugh when people say pseudo-scientific stuff like "energy can't be created or destroyed ... the energy of your personality HAS to go somewhere!" (ie spirit/heaven/whatever)

When I snap a DVD in two, no one ever says "but where did the movie go???"

 

[akachan ningen]

I just can't wait until science fully knows most of this stuff.

Its very interesting.

science doesn't know anything, it's just a process. people know things. or at least we think we do.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Anybody ever listen to the GTA IV radio station, "The Journey"? Here's a link

The DJ has some great existential quotes:
"Good afternoon, history is ending. Who knows when."
"Thank God for the digital age, now you don't need friends, now you don't need God. You can just have computers talk to you instead. We are better at pretending to like you."
"The Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Slowly, you being to realize you are completely irrelevant."

I love this one:
"I am very old. Older than your species. The universe is laughing at you. Especially when you touch yourself. Is that all you've got?"

lol

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

science doesn't know anything, it's just a process. people know things. or at least we think we do.

You know what I mean.

 

[GillianSeed79]

I was facinated with the philosophical idea of consciousness in college after taking an existentialism course. Reading Sartre's stuff for the first time and the whole notion of being and the other was a mind blowing, eye opening experience. Not only consciousness, but the fact that others' consciousness always supercedes you. Like you are you but you will never actually know you like other people percieve you. You are created by the other and vice versa. It's hard to explain, but reading Sartre and other existentialists is like dropping acid.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

\There is no reason to believe that the basis for consciousness cannot have a scientific explanation other than its current shortcoming.

'

You mean besides the fact that consciousness is a metaphysical concept and therefore could never be verified or refuted by science? If you cannot objectively define and quantify "something" you are never going to be able to apply science to it. Even more to the point studying the brain and cognitive science will not and can not exclude a metaphysical explanation being as how the term itself is metaphysical.

Consciousness is not a term of science (in this context). So yes there is every reason to believe it cannot have a scientific explanation for it is a metaphysical concept. Granted we can study the brain and learn all about how it functions and our behavior related to it. Which nullifies some of the explanations and mythos surrounding consciousness. But it doesn't even touch some the the "biggies."

 

[SystemShock2]

I always wonder where my thoughts come from when there's not direct inspiration. Like when I'm falling asleep and an idea I've never had before pops into my mind, seemingly out of nowhere. What causes this thought to bubble up?

 

[Kevtones]

I always get caught up in the linearity of it all. Spark -> life -> fade -> death? Like we're caught on the X-Axis and we can't find the Y even though it's there.

 

[Tetraeon]

Anyone here ever hear of Daniel Dennett? Anyway, he wrote a book called Consciousness Explained, and it's got some pretty interesting stuff in it. Definitely thread-applicable information.

 

[rdrr gnr]

Anyone here ever hear of Daniel Dennett? Anyway, he wrote a book called Consciousness Explained, and it's got some pretty interesting stuff in it. Definitely thread-applicable information.

Dennett is great, as is that book -- though I've only read snippets.

 

[Monocle]

Anyone here ever hear of Daniel Dennett? Anyway, he wrote a book called Consciousness Explained, and it's got some pretty interesting stuff in it. Definitely thread-applicable information.

Excellent recommendation. I was just about to post this. Zaptruder's post is a pretty good (though simplified) summary of Dennett's thesis.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Your successes depend on the failures of others.

 

[Zaptruder]

'

You mean besides the fact that consciousness is a metaphysical concept and therefore could never be verified or refuted by science? If you cannot objectively define and quantify "something" you are never going to be able to apply science to it. Even more to the point studying the brain and cognitive science will not and can not exclude a metaphysical explanation being as how the term itself is metaphysical.

Consciousness is not a term of science (in this context). So yes there is every reason to believe it cannot have a scientific explanation for it is a metaphysical concept. Granted we can study the brain and learn all about how it functions and our behavior related to it. Which nullifies some of the explanations and mythos surrounding consciousness. But it doesn't even touch some the the "biggies."

Can you elaborate on some of these 'biggies'... relating how science and its findings can do nothing to illuminate us on them?

 

[Broseybrose]

24/7 to varying degrees.

 

[FantasticMrFoxdie]

Yep.

 

[Ajemsuhgao]

 

[John Rabbit]

Does "existence" fascinate anyone else?

 

[BocoDragon]

This is evil.

 

[rdrr gnr]

This is evil.

Breathing manually, through one nostril at a time.

 

[Orayn]

Breathing manually, through one nostril at a time.

Also, blinking manually and fully aware of the feeling of your clothes against your skin.
You're welcome.

 

[Dr. Malik]

It does, until you realize how much humanity has convoluted life with worthless required shit

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Can you elaborate on some of these 'biggies'... relating how science and its findings can do nothing to illuminate us on them?

Dreaming is the biggest and most readily available example. Once you realize that you can experience different realities with different rules all seemingly within ones mind/consciousness how can one not doubt the inherent "reality" of the meat world?

Now science can examine the brain and the associated neurological/physiological changes associated with dreaming. In fact this is almost exclusively what science CAN address. But this hardly touches the topic of the nature of reality. This is going to be true for all abstract concepts related to the self. Cognitive science has made huge strides in explaining and understanding the mind and cognition. Even with perfect knowledge of the physiology and neurology involved it would not validate/invalidate a metaphysical explanation for a metaphysical concept like "consciousness" or even more a more grounded concept like "intelligence."

The terms themselves are of a flavor that limits what science can address in relationship to them. And as must be repeated constantly science has inherent limits to the things it can applied to. Knowledge of the brain does not touch or threaten the more esoteric beliefs involved. Its not within the scope of the tool to do so.

 

[MetalAlien]

I like to think of the mind like the layers of the ocean. Our conscious mind is like the top layers where sunlight can penetrate, it is illuminated for us to see and interact with. Then there is the transistion zone where we dream that is like the Bathypelagic zone of the ocean. No light reaches this depth but dreams can still bubble up from it. Then as you go into the Abyssopelagic zone you find the parts of the mind responsible for boring stuff like breathing and other body functions.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

Sometimes when I'm sitting with nothing else to do, my mind just wanders to thoughts like this. Sometimes it will just strike me out of the blue that I am myself. There is no outside observer. I am some sort of process going on inside my head and everything I know about the universe goes through me. By some miracle of probability I was born and given the chance to experience, something most will never aspire to do. And when I think things like this, I just get stunned. A feeling comes over my body that can't be replicated by any other means. Like a hollow coldness that I feel in my chest. And my head feels empty. It usually lasts nothing more than a few seconds, but is fairly easy to call back by just re-contemplating how, in this vast universe, somehow, I am able to exist. Even more shocking is that, beyond just existing, I've reach some point where I'm able to recognize my own existence, and sheer, stupid, improbable, wonder of it all. Sometimes these thoughts just come out of the blue.

Usually when I'm on the toilet.

I've had them less since I got an iPhone.

 

[rdrr gnr]

Also, blinking manually and fully aware of the feeling of your clothes against your skin.
You're welcome.

I'm naked. Your witchcraft does not work on me.

 

[Deleted member 22576]

Oh man don't get me started on the things I think.