On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:17 AM Terren Suydam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> We should always pay attention to all relevant *BEHAVIOR**,* including >> *BEHAVIOR* such as noises produced by the mouths of other people. >> > > *> Got it. Accounts of subjective experience are not the salient facts in > these experiments, it's the way they move their lips and tongue and pass > air through their vocal cords that matters. The rest of the world has moved > on from BF Skinner, but not you, apparently. * > Forget BF Skinner, this is more general than consciousness or behavior. If you want to explain Y at the most fundamental level from first principles you can't start with "X produces Y'' and then use X as part of your explanation of Y. > >>> *Why doesn't that represent progress? * >>> >> >> >> It may represent progress but not progress towards understanding >> consciousness. >> > > *> Why not? Understanding how the brain maps or encodes different > subjective experiences * > Because understanding how the brain maps and encodes information will tell you lots about behavior and intelligence but absolutely nothing about consciousness. *> If we can explain why, for example, you see stars if you bash the back > of your head,* > It might be able to explain why I say "I see green stars" but that's not what you're interested in, you want to know why I subjectively experience the green qualia and if it's the same as your green qualia, but no theory can even prove to you that I see any qualia at all. *> You make it sound as though there's nothing to be gleaned from > systematic investigation,* > It's impossible to systematically investigate everything therefor a scientist needs to use judgment to determine what is worth his time and what is not. Every minute you spend on consciousness research is a minute you could've spent on researching something far far more productive, which would be pretty much anything. Consciousness research has made ZERO progress over the last thousand years and I have every reason to believe it will make twice as much during the next thousand. *> the thing I understand the least is how incurious you are about it.* The thing I find puzzling is how incurious you and virtually all internet consciousness mavens are about how intelligence works. Figuring out intelligence is a solvable problem, but figuring out consciousness is not, probably because it's just a brute fact that consciousness is the way data feels when it is being processed. If so then there's nothing more they can be said about consciousness, however I am well aware that after all is said and done more is always said and done. 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/CAJPayv0RTqv_FdnC6szHBEHO_gM%3DSeXJ86z9FEJmkW_Ba%2B7edg%40mail.gmail.com.
