Mayo 3, 2025

"If you’re looking for a theory to explain how our brains give rise to subjective, inner experiences, you can check out Adaptive Resonance Theory. Or..."

"... consider Dynamic Core Theory. Don’t forget First Order Representational Theory, not to mention semantic pointer competition theory. The list goes on: A 2021 survey identified 29 different theories of consciousness...."

From "Two Theories of Consciousness Faced Off. The Ref Took a Beating/What makes humans conscious? Scientists disagree, strongly, as one group of peacemakers discovered the hard way" (NYT).
Ipinaskil ni Ann Althouse sa 3:41 PM
Tags:

15 komento:

n.n ayon kay ...

Articles of faith. Science cannot discern origin and expression.

5/3/25, 3:57 PM
Iman ayon kay ...

Maybe the Ref needed such a beatin’.

5/3/25, 3:58 PM
Aggie ayon kay ...

"...
"If you’re looking for a theory to explain how our brains give rise to subjective, inner experiences, you can check out Adaptive Resonance Theory. Or... consider Dynamic Core Theory..."

But I'm not looking for that.

5/3/25, 5:00 PM
Narr ayon kay ...

The human brain did not evolve to understand and explain consciousness.

5/3/25, 5:53 PM
Luke Lea ayon kay ...
Naalis ng may-ari ang komentong ito.
5/3/25, 5:56 PM
Luke Lea ayon kay ...
Naalis ng may-ari ang komentong ito.
5/3/25, 6:02 PM
Luke Lea ayon kay ...
Naalis ng may-ari ang komentong ito.
5/3/25, 6:05 PM
rhhardin ayon kay ...

Theories of consciousness all move the same problem all over again somewhere else.

The only actual use of "consciousness" is telling a doctor "I'm conscious now." Other uses are language on holiday, working off of some picture or another. "I'm conscious now" involves no picture, just a report.

5/3/25, 6:22 PM
Luke Lea ayon kay ...

On theories of consciousness, maybe they should start with theories of pain, which is a lot simpler but equally unscientific. Science limits itself to the study of objective "facts," or, if you prefer, to intersubjective experiences: experiences that two or more observers have direct access to and can agree upon. Consciousness (and pain) definitely do not fall into that category. And never will.

On the other hand, if you smash someone's finger with a hammer, they will probably yell. We can agree about that. Moreover, we can sympathize (empathize?) with the person yelling, because we can imagine how we would feel if we were in their place. Good literature (novels, poetry, drama) often feeds on that ability we have to sympathize and empathize with purely fictional characters. It's not science though.

5/3/25, 6:24 PM
rhhardin ayon kay ...

I think a computer is a nice learning experience for not having consciousness. At some time the beginning programmer will have to write a program to sort a list. The first attempt will make some serious mistake, producing an infinite loop. How can the computer be so stupid as to do exactly what I told it to do instead of something useful?

Gives a feel for the absolute unconsiousness of computers.

Disposing the simulation hypothesis directly.

Coleridge's version: matter has no inwards.

5/3/25, 6:27 PM
rhhardin ayon kay ...

Philosopher in a talk explained that pain was just this or that receptor responding to this or that. I raised my hand: does that mean that I have two ways to know I'm in pain? He dismissed the question.

Some author, I think probably David Chalmers, said that 30% of people cannot understand the no-inwards argument. Why is it like anything to be me?

5/3/25, 6:30 PM
n.n ayon kay ...

Love from conception. Homicide from six weeks. Consciousness is correlated in scientific models with nervous system function, but that is not the origin, since it may evolve from an unobservable state in proximity to conception and throughout life under unknown, perhaps unknowable circumstances.

5/3/25, 8:06 PM
Lazarus ayon kay ...

"Cognitive science" is a thing now. It wasn't when I was in school, at least not outside of graduate psychology and philosophy courses. I suppose consciousness comes with speech, but your dear friend Grok can speak and is not truly conscious (unless it's really conscious and pretending not to be).

5/4/25, 9:56 AM
mikee ayon kay ...

A character in a Terry Pratchett Discworld novel describes First, Second, Third Thoughts. First Thoughts are about external things. Second Thoughts consider how you think about things. Third Thoughts, very rare except in exceptional people and witches, are about why you think the way you think about things. I think that about covers the topic at hand, and avoids a lot of arguments if you think about having them beforehand.

5/4/25, 10:32 AM
Josephbleau ayon kay ...

“Disposing the simulation hypothesis directly.”

But there may be layers, The computer running the simulation could have been programmed by a more qualified agent.

5/4/25, 12:55 PM

Mag-post ng isang Komento

Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.