What is consciousness?

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator: Metacrock

The Pixie
Posts: 852
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: What is consciousness?

Post by The Pixie » Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:08 am

Jim B. wrote:
The Pixie wrote:
met wrote:Well, at least it takes all the phenomena into account; not denying the existence of the subjective, the first-person frame altogether to make the problem seem "solvable? "

That seems a non-solution....
That does seem a non-solution. Is anyone doing that?
Yes. Dennett for one is doing that. He thinks that if you can't reduce the subjective to the objective, then you haven't really explained it. The assumption seems to be that consciousness must fit the standard pattern of scientific reduction.
That is not quite the same as denying the existence of the subjective though, is it?

I came across this interesting page about Dennett's position; I think it makes a lot of sense.
https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/publ ... au-debate/
So to sceintifically explain liquidity, you have to appeal to things that are not liquid. You can;t just say things are liquid because they participate in the property of 'the moist.' You have to discharge that property onto things that don;t exhibit that property. Otherwise you're just mystifying wetness.
Not sure what you are saying here. To explain liquidity you have to look at the movement of molecules and the intermolecular forces that are in the liquid, and compare them to solids and gases, so yes, you appeal to things that are not liquids, but I suspect that is not what you mean.
Similarly, the assumption is that to explain consciousness, you have to appeal to non-conscious things. The whole point of a reductionist approach to consciousness is to fully account for it in terms of third person (objective) truths.
This seems to be like objecting to the definition of a word using other different words. Any useful definition of a word will necessarily be made up of different words. Similarly I cannot imagine how something can be explained without reference to other things.

Jim B.
Posts: 1440
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: What is consciousness?

Post by Jim B. » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:52 am

The Pixie wrote: That is not quite the same as denying the existence of the subjective though, is it?

I came across this interesting page about Dennett's position; I think it makes a lot of sense.
https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/publ ... au-debate/
Where specifically in this article or exchange is what I wrote contradicted? He identifies conscious states with internal neuronal states. They're the same thing, according to him and Papineau. In "Consciousness Explained" he states that "phenomenology doesn't exist. It only seems to." He also writes to papineau that once we've explained the behavior of the brain/nervous system, we can "declare victory." There's nothing more to be explained.
Not sure what you are saying here. To explain liquidity you have to look at the movement of molecules and the intermolecular forces that are in the liquid, and compare them to solids and gases, so yes, you appeal to things that are not liquids, but I suspect that is not what you mean.
I'm saying that Dennett assumes that consciousness is reducible in the same way that third person phenomena like water are. He does lable himself quite openly a "third person absolutist," which means that allowing for any irreducible reality to subjectivity is ruled out going in.
This seems to be like objecting to the definition of a word using other different words. Any useful definition of a word will necessarily be made up of different words. Similarly I cannot imagine how something can be explained without reference to other things.
Not just any words but words relating to a third-person, physical perspcetive. also consciousness may be a basic property that cannot be definitively reduced to another group of words. It might take immediate familiarity, ie actually being conscious, to really understand what it is.

User avatar
met
Posts: 2813
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: What is consciousness?

Post by met » Fri Nov 24, 2017 10:41 am

Dennett writes...
. But there seems to be a second transduction; that is an illusion, and it can be explained. We’re working on it.
I think what's being objected to here, the question that Jim, me and many others are asking here is ...."how can it be explained? Give us a clue, then, at least in principle?"

Even something like an untested framework that remains as completely-theoretical as string theory at least makes hypotheses that can be tested in principle (with a particle accelerator as big as the Milky Way or whatever). But here, there seems to be no more even theorectical groundwork in place than you accuse your nonphysicalist opponents of lacking. Instead we seem to have been presented with little more a bald assertion of reducibility and "sameness" in a situation where "difference" - the existence of a first person perspective on qualia ("what red looks like to me") in stark contrast with a third person one - seems the more obvious and intuitive case.
The “One” is the space of the “world” of the tick, but also the “pinch” of the lobster, or that rendezvous in person to confirm online pictures (with a new lover or an old God). This is the machinery operative...as “onto-theology."
Dr Ward Blanton

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 9997
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: What is consciousness?

Post by Metacrock » Sat Nov 25, 2017 5:41 am

here is a discussion of consciousness pix and I had on cadre, unfortunately the idiot skeptical screwed up the good vibes,

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2017 ... 7334461696
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

Jim B.
Posts: 1440
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: What is consciousness?

Post by Jim B. » Sat Nov 25, 2017 2:26 pm

Metacrock wrote:here is a discussion of consciousness pix and I had on cadre, unfortunately the idiot skeptical screwed up the good vibes,

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2017 ... 7334461696
One of the tactics he falls back on the most is appeal to motive. Your beliefs are tainted and suspect because you are religious and you form your beliefs for religious motives. RELIGION: BAD!!! Why can't he focus on the arguments and the evidence themselves? He also engages in a lot of ad hominem. To be fair, both of you do. I know it's hard to resist when you're engaging with skep.

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 9997
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: What is consciousness?

Post by Metacrock » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:02 am

Jim B. wrote:
Metacrock wrote:here is a discussion of consciousness pix and I had on cadre, unfortunately the idiot skeptical screwed up the good vibes,

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2017 ... 7334461696
One of the tactics he falls back on the most is appeal to motive. Your beliefs are tainted and suspect because you are religious and you form your beliefs for religious motives. RELIGION: BAD!!! Why can't he focus on the arguments and the evidence themselves? He also engages in a lot of ad hominem. To be fair, both of you do. I know it's hard to resist when you're engaging with skep.
you are talking about skep but it souded you were talking about Pixie, skep totally embarrassed himself in that thread,
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

Post Reply