On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 4:19 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 5/3/2019 11:44 AM, Terren Suydam wrote: > > > On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:10 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I think that is right. But when you consider some simplified cases, e.g. >> a computation written out on paper (or Bruno's movie graph) it becomes >> apparent that consciousness must ultimately refer to other things. >> > > Right, the movie graph argument shows that consciousness doesn't supervene > on physical computation. Nevertheless, the character of my consciousness > still corresponds with the kind of cybernetic system implemented by e.g. my > brain and body, as instantiated by the infinity of programs going through > my state. > > > What makes it "your state"? It's just a bunch of programs. Why those > programs and not others? > It's the set of programs that implements the body/brain used to construct my inner world. > > >> Much is made of "self-awareness" but this is usually just having an >> internal model of one's body, or social standing or some other model of the >> self. It is not consciousness of consciousness...that is only a temporal >> reflection: "I was conscious just now." >> > > I see it a little differently. The self-model/ego is a higher-order > construct that organizes the system in a holistic way. > > > ? That sounds like a kind of dualism. You're postulating something that > creates a "higher-order construct". If you're following Bruno's idea > things have to just come out of the UD threads. There's nothing to create > anything more. > For the self-image construct, I mean 'construct' in the same way that anything we learn is a construct. The self-image represents a higher-order construct on top of the types of constructs that, say, a dog might employ. A dog has a self-image of a certain type, but with humans (for whom I'll call the self-image 'ego' to differentiate from animal self-image), the ego's construction is conceptual and requires language. The ego is a narrative, and that narrative acts to organize the system as a whole. > > We take this for granted - it's the water we swim in - but our minds are > radically re-organized as children by the taught narrative that we have an > identity > > > You don't have teach a kid he has an identity. He knows who's hungry. He > has a view point. > > Just like a dog. But a kid knows his name (learned) and can answer the question, "why did you do that?". The answer to that question is also largely learned. We are told who to be, what's right, wrong, appropriate, taboo, etc., for the culture we grow up in. IOW why I do something is filtered through learned cultural constructs. Most of the time the answer amounts to a justification in terms of what's appropriate, logical, or some other descriptor that benefits me in some way relative to the implicit values I'm socialized to. This form of self-image is of a higher order than whatever self-image my dog has. Terren > Brent > > and this unitary identity is the *cause* of our behavior (when the > evidence shows that we merely rationalize our behavior in terms of that > narrative). Point being, the way the cybernetic system is organized takes a > quantum leap in complexity as a result - and this is responsible for the > subjective awareness of ourselves as people. > > In the dream state (except for lucid dreaming), our self-model is not > energized - ongoing experience in dreams is not organized in terms of that > narrative of being someone. When lucid dreaming begins, it is because we > can say "I am dreaming", which is to say that the self-model becomes > active. In that moment, the character of that dream consciousness changes > dramatically. > > >> In general terms we could say consciousness is awareness of the >> evironment, where that includes one's body. Damasio identifies emotions as >> awareness of the bodies state. The point is that the stuff of which we are >> aware and which we find agreement with other people's awareness is what we >> infer to be the physical world. It might be possible to be conscious in >> some sense without a physical world, but it would be qualitatively >> different. >> > > Yes. However, it's not clear what it would mean for a conscious agent to > experience something that wasn't a "physical" world, even if the > environment was completely virtual. The Matrix illustrates that nicely. > > Terren > > >> >> Brent >> >> On 5/3/2019 6:27 AM, Terren Suydam wrote: >> >> One way to get around this is to hold that consciousness is associated >> with the way information is processed. This is substrate independent - the >> fact that a brain is physical is beside the point. You could implement a >> brain in software, and insofar as the same kinds of information processing >> occur, it would be conscious in the same kind of way. >> >> I find this idea compelling because it makes the link between brains and >> consciousness without requiring matter, and provides a framework for >> understanding consciousnesses of other kinds of machines. All that's >> required is to assume there is something it is like for computation to >> occur. >> >> Terren >> >> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 2:26 AM <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 8:03:52 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5/2/2019 4:55 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 5:37:26 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 5/2/2019 11:39 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Apparently *matter* is not "reducible" to just the physics a couple >>>>> of particles. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then you're not a materialist. You think there is matter plus >>>>> something else, that everyone calls "mind", but you're going to call it >>>>> "matter" and add it to everyone else's list of matter so you can still >>>>> call >>>>> yourself a materialist. >>>>> >>>>> Brent >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> But everything reducing to the physics of particles is thought of as >>>> *physicalism* (not materialism): >>>> *Physicalism and materialism* >>>> >>>> Reductive physicalism >>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductive_physicalism>...is normally >>>> assumed to be incompatible with panpsychism. Materialism >>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism>, if held to be distinct >>>> from physicalism, is compatible with panpsychism insofar as mental >>>> properties >>>> >>>> >>>> What mental properties? intention? reflection? remembering? That's >>>> what I mean by saying attributing "experience" to matter is an unprincipled >>>> half-measure. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>> >>> >>> Brains are matter, just as livers, legs, trees, tables, rocks, comets, >>> planets, stars, cockroaches, galaxies, bacteria .. are matter. >>> >>> Brains produce intentions, reflections, remembrances, ... . >>> >>> So (at least some) matter of the cosmos has psychical (mental) >>> properties. >>> >>> The body+mind idea, the idea that mind is something separate from body, >>> is perhaps the worst idea ever invented. >>> >>> @philipthrift >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
