On 16 February 2010 22:21, Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Consciousness could be computable in the sense that if you are the > computation, you have the experience. Yes, but that's precisely not the sense I was referring to. Rather the sense I'm picking out is that neither the existence, nor the specifically experiential characteristics, of any 1-p component over and above the 3-p level of description is accessible (computable) in terms of any such 3-p narrative. Consequently any reference to such a component at the 3-p level seems inexplicable. This leads some (e.g. Dennett, if I've understood him) to try to finesse this by claiming that 1-p experience only "seems" to exist - IOW that when 3-me refers to 3-my "conscious experience" this is merely a 3-p reference to some equivalent computational aspect which is fully sufficient to account for all the resultant 3-p phenomena. The 1-p "seeming" is then supposed to be, in some under-defined sense, "identical" to this computation. But for two manifestly distinct levels of description to have any prospect of being seen as "identical", they must be capable of being discarded individually, in order to be jointly reconciled in terms of a single more fundamental level clearly compatible with both - this is the only manoeuvre that could validate any non-question-begging ascription of "identity". ISTM that the Dennettian approach is merely to *assert* - given the undeniable "seeming" of conscious experience - that this *must* be the case, whilst offering no glimmer of what the nature of such a transcendent level of reconciliation could possibly be. David > On 17 February 2010 05:07, David Nyman <david.ny...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This is old hat, but I've been thinking about it on awakening every >> morning for the last week. Is consciousness - i.e. the actual first- >> person experience itself - literally uncomputable from any third- >> person perspective? The only rationale for adducing the additional >> existence of any 1-p experience in a 3-p world is the raw fact that we >> possess it (or "seem" to, according to some). We can't "compute" the >> existence of any 1-p experiential component of a 3-p process on purely >> 3-p grounds. Further, if we believe that 3-p process is a closed and >> sufficient explanation for all events, this of course leads to the >> uncomfortable conclusion (referred to, for example, by Chalmers in >> TCM) that 1-p conscious phenomena (the "raw feels" of sight, sound, >> pain, fear and all the rest) are totally irrelevant to what's >> happening, including our every thought and action. >> >> But doesn't this lead to paradox? For example, how are we able to >> refer to these phenomena if they are causally disconnected from our >> behaviour - i.e. they are uncomputable (i.e. inaccessible) from the 3- >> p perspective? Citing "identity" doesn't seem to help here - the >> issue is how 1-p phenomena could ever emerge as features of our shared >> behavioural world (including, of course, talking about them) if they >> are forever inaccessible from a causally closed and sufficient 3-p >> perspective. Does this in fact lead to the conclusion that the 3-p >> world can't be causally closed to 1-p experience, and that I really do >> withdraw my finger from the fire because it hurts, and not just >> because C-fibres are firing? But how? > > Consciousness could be computable in the sense that if you are the > computation, you have the experience. > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.