On 9/6/03 2:34 AM, "arnoud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you look at consciousness scientifically you would like an operational > (measurement of behaviour) definition. In that case two can be > given(sketched): 1 consciousness is attention and control. 2 consciousness is > reporting of internal mental events. > An agent can have consciousness-1 without consciousness-2, but not vv. Most > (all?) animals are conscious-1, but only(?) humans are conscious-2. Of course > to be conscious-2 the ability for language is needed, and a basic model of > how the mind works (e.g. the intentional stance).
I would define consciousness more simply as being able to measure the impact of your existence on those things you observe. Think of it as a purely inferred self-existence where you never observe yourself but much of your sensory input suggests that the "you" entity exists wherever you are indirectly. The constant inference of an entity's existence would create a very thorough model of an entity that is never observed but which always apparently "is". The model is exquisitely detailed because you are constantly bombarded with indirect evidence of its existence. I would say that consciousness is at its essence a purely inferred self-model, which naturally requires a fairly large machine to support the model. Cheers, -James Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
