On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 10:08 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> It certainly seems likely that any brain or AI that can perceive sensory > events and form an inner narrative and memory of that is conscious in a > sense even if they are unable to act. This is commonly the situation > during a dream. One is aware of dreamt events but doesn't actually move in > response to them. > > And I think JKC is wrong when he says "few if any believe other people > are conscious all the time, only during those times that corresponds to the > times they behave intelligently." I generally assume people are conscious > if their eyes are open and they respond to stimuli, even if they are doing > something dumb. > Or rather, even if they're doing nothing at all. Someone meditating for hours on end, or someone lying on a couch with eyeshades and headphones on tripping on psilocybin, may be having extraordinary internal experiences and display absolutely no outward behavior. > But I agree with his general point that consciousness is easy and > intelligence is hard. > It depends how you look at it. JC's point is that it's impossible to prove much of anything about consciousness, so you can imagine many ways to explain consciousness without ever suffering the pain of your theory being slain by a fact. However, in a certain sense, intelligence is easier because it's constrained. Intelligence can be tested. It's certainly more practical, which makes intelligence easier to study as well. You're much more likely to be able to profit from advances in understanding of intelligence. In that sense, consciousness is harder to work with than intelligence, because it's harder to make progress. Facts that might slay your theory are much harder to come by. > I think human consciousness, having an inner narrative, is just an > evolutionary trick the brain developed for learning and accessing learned > information to inform decisions. Julian Jaynes wrote a book about how this > may have come about, "The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the > Bicameral Mind". I don't know that he got it exactly right, but I think he > was on to the right idea. > I agree! Terren > > Brent > > On 4/26/2021 4:07 PM, Terren Suydam wrote: > > So do you have nothing to say about coma patients who've later woken up > and said they were conscious? Or people under general anaesthetic who > later report being gruesomely aware of the surgery they were getting? > Should we ignore those reports? Or admit that consciousness is worth > considering independently from its effects on outward behavior? > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:16 AM John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 10:45 AM Terren Suydam <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > It's impossible to refute solipsism >>> >> >> True, but it's equally impossible to refute the idea that everything >> including rocks is conscious. And if both a theory and its exact opposite >> can neither be proven nor disproven then neither speculation is of any >> value in trying to figure out how the world works. >> >> * > It's true that the only thing we know for sure is our own >>> consciousness,* >>> >> And I know that even I am not conscious all the time, and there is no >> reason for me to believe other people can do better. >> >> >>> * > but there's nothing about what I said that makes it impossible for >>> there to be a reality outside of ourselves populated by other people. It >>> just requires belief.* >>> >> >> And few if any believe other people are conscious all the time, only >> during those times that corresponds to the times they behave >> intelligently. >> >> John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis >> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> >> -- >> 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 view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3NKKuSpfc0%3DemkA75U4rvEmS%2B_bBWtM%3D_Xhc5XnWOr0g%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3NKKuSpfc0%3DemkA75U4rvEmS%2B_bBWtM%3D_Xhc5XnWOr0g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMy3ZA9BY%2BBVTmBqaMNtDwqCUC%3DcZ7H%2BCx_ihmr_Dy5prjn7WQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMy3ZA9BY%2BBVTmBqaMNtDwqCUC%3DcZ7H%2BCx_ihmr_Dy5prjn7WQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/72cf6136-17df-2be5-bdba-5dadf036e08e%40verizon.net > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/72cf6136-17df-2be5-bdba-5dadf036e08e%40verizon.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMy3ZA8td-C7eacVOiBSGPMjiE%3DLoLKfEj8MLothH0jfBDutsg%40mail.gmail.com.
