Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Is the mind the same as the body? What is consciousness? Can machines have it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Skepdick
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Skepdick »

I Like Sushu wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 2:52 pm I don’t understand the question, but I’ve been down that road before. Perhaps using the term ‘quale’ would help? I’m not a fan of it but it seems to fit something akin to what Steve is attempting to refer to.
That wouldn't be charitable at all. I would be cheating him of the truth.

There comes a point at which you end up staring at the abyss. You simply have to accept certain concepts on faith.

Many things in science are explained in terms of the CONCEPT of "energy".
We know how to measure energy, but we don't know what energy IS. Ontologically speaking.

Many things in science are explained in terms of the CONCEPT of "time".
We know how to measure time, but we don't know what time IS. Ontologically speaking.

Many things in science are explained in terms of the CONCEPT of "mass".
We know how to measure mass, but we don't know what mass IS. Ontologically speaking.

We can certainly speak of no qualia for energy, time or mass. We only accept them on their pragmatic utility and the authority of the SI units.
I Like Sushu
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:03 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by I Like Sushu »

Each to their own. Tough love works better for some than for others. Generally I doubt anyone is ready to believe anything unless they get there in their own way. Some believe it better to make the person believe they’ve come to a conclusion themselves rather than having it force fed to them.

Science has no concern with meaning. Scientists are a whole other amalgam of creatures out for their own perverse reasons.
I Like Sushu
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:03 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by I Like Sushu »

We can speak of anything we wish to. Whether or not it makes sense, or has any positive use, is another thing entirely .... he says drumbling the squash finders hat piece under the yellow fringe of tomorrow’s plush-thumber; on the Wednesday the day before Monday of course (note the purple smell after tingle back rumps).

Grammar and semantics! What a merry mess eh? :P
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 1:55 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 1:43 pm So I guess that the end of any serious conversation with you about this issue.
I am being dead serious when I am pointing out that you don't understand your own question.

As insulting as this may sound to you. It's true.
You seriously think that pointing out how a Computer Detects Red explains anything about how we See Red? If you do then that shows that it is you that does not understand the question.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

I Like Sushu wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 2:52 pm
Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 1:55 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 1:43 pm So I guess that the end of any serious conversation with you about this issue.
I am being dead serious when I am pointing out that you don't understand your own question.

As insulting as this may sound to you. It's true.
Be charitable. Maybe it’s a little nebulous. I’m sure there are different ways for them to express the question (whatever it is?)

I don’t understand the question, but I’ve been down that road before. Perhaps using the term ‘quale’ would help? I’m not a fan of it but it seems to fit something akin to what Steve is attempting to refer to.
Of course I'm talking about the Quale. It is the Redness Quale. I thought that on a Philosophy Forum that this would be assumed.
I Like Sushu
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:03 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by I Like Sushu »

Steve -

Stating the obvious can sometimes help. There are numerous ways to try and express an idea/viewpoint. Honestly I think you’re going to have a hard time with this one here unless you try a different tack and/or supplement what you mean with another separate, yet related, line of questioning/investigation.

I don’t think you’re going to get much more out of me at least on this topic. Just trying to help find SOME common ground. I’m not interested in complete ‘agreement’ myself.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 2:56 pm
I Like Sushu wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 2:52 pm I don’t understand the question, but I’ve been down that road before. Perhaps using the term ‘quale’ would help? I’m not a fan of it but it seems to fit something akin to what Steve is attempting to refer to.
That wouldn't be charitable at all. I would be cheating him of the truth.

There comes a point at which you end up staring at the abyss. You simply have to accept certain concepts on faith.

Many things in science are explained in terms of the CONCEPT of "energy".
We know how to measure energy, but we don't know what energy IS. Ontologically speaking.

Many things in science are explained in terms of the CONCEPT of "time".
We know how to measure time, but we don't know what time IS. Ontologically speaking.

Many things in science are explained in terms of the CONCEPT of "mass".
We know how to measure mass, but we don't know what mass IS. Ontologically speaking.

We can certainly speak of no qualia for energy, time or mass. We only accept them on their pragmatic utility and the authority of the SI units.
Let's take Energy as an example. Science has discovered a vast amount of principles regarding Energy. Books have been written, Nobel Prizes have been earned. We know that Electromagnetic Energy is the interplay of Electric and Magnetic fields for example. Yes we don't have the Deep understanding but we know a lot about Electric and Magnetic fields. Again Books have been written.

But there is Zero understanding of the Experience of Redness. All Science can say is Neural Activity happens and then a Conscious Experience of Redness happens. Not wanting to further pursue how Neural Activity can lead to a Conscious Experience is Surrender to Ignorance.
Skepdick
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:26 pm Let's take Energy as an example. Science has discovered a vast amount of principles regarding Energy. Books have been written, Nobel Prizes have been earned. We know that Electromagnetic Energy is the interplay of Electric and Magnetic fields for example. Yes we don't have the Deep understanding but we know a lot about Electric and Magnetic fields. Again Books have been written.
And in ALL if this babbling you don't notice that we know NOTHING about energy itself?

It's just a concept!
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:26 pm But there is Zero understanding of the Experience of Redness. All Science can say is Neural Activity happens and then a Conscious Experience of Redness happens.
Which is far more than science can say about HOW energy happens!

We can write books on consciousness and award Nobel prizes to people in cognitive science. If that's what you are asking for.

It's not going to change the fact that we know more about HOW consciousness works than we do about HOW energy works.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

I Like Sushu wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:17 pm Steve -

Stating the obvious can sometimes help. There are numerous ways to try and express an idea/viewpoint. Honestly I think you’re going to have a hard time with this one here unless you try a different tack and/or supplement what you mean with another separate, yet related, line of questioning/investigation.

I don’t think you’re going to get much more out of me at least on this topic. Just trying to help find SOME common ground. I’m not interested in complete ‘agreement’ myself.
If nothing I have said has convinced you then I have failed in your case. Thanks for trying.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:30 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:26 pm Let's take Energy as an example. Science has discovered a vast amount of principles regarding Energy. Books have been written, Nobel Prizes have been earned. We know that Electromagnetic Energy is the interplay of Electric and Magnetic fields for example. Yes we don't have the Deep understanding but we know a lot about Electric and Magnetic fields. Again Books have been written.
And in ALL if this babbling you don't notice that we know NOTHING about energy itself?

It's just a concept!
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:26 pm But there is Zero understanding of the Experience of Redness. All Science can say is Neural Activity happens and then a Conscious Experience of Redness happens.
Which is far more than science can say about HOW energy happens!

We can write books on consciousness and award Nobel prizes to people in cognitive science. If that's what you are asking for.

It's not going to change the fact that we know more about HOW consciousness works than we do about HOW energy works.
You didn't notice that I said we don't have the Deep understanding of Electric and Magnetic fields? So you think the Volumes and Books that have been written are all just babbles? It shows that there is something different about Consciousness. We don't even have anything to Babble about. Consciousness just is, period. That's not acceptable.
Skepdick
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:41 pm You didn't notice that I said we don't have the Deep understanding of Electric and Magnetic fields?
You seem to be confusing yourself. The 'deep' understanding you speak of is about what 'energy' DOES. It's not about HOW energy works.

Our understanding of energy is limited to behaviourism.
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:41 pm It shows that there is something different about Consciousness. We don't even have anything to Babble about. Consciousness just is, period. That's not acceptable.
If we stick to the behaviourist view-point there is plenty to babble about! We know a lot about what consciousness does.

Consciousness (re)cognizes and identifies things.
We can explain how identification works well enough that we can make computer do it.
https://pjreddie.com/darknet/yolov2/

Consciousness classifies/categorizes things.
We can explain how classification works well enough that we can make computers do it with machine learning algorithms.

Consciousness has the ability to reason/logic.
We can understand and explain logic well enough to computers.

What you seem to be struggling with is the 1st vs 3rd person perspective. You want science to explain your experiences to you.

It can't do that.
Skepdick
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:41 pm It shows that there is something different about Consciousness. We don't even have anything to Babble about.
This is fundamentally your mistake. You think the explanation of consciousness can be produces in English and given the concepts you currently possess.

What if the 'explanation' for consciousness requires you to learn a new set of concepts/languages in order for you to comprehend it?

Like this: https://github.com/pjreddie/darknet
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:50 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:41 pm You didn't notice that I said we don't have the Deep understanding of Electric and Magnetic fields?
You seem to be confusing yourself. The 'deep' understanding you speak of is about what 'energy' DOES. It's not about HOW energy works.

Our understanding of energy is limited to behaviourism.
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:41 pm It shows that there is something different about Consciousness. We don't even have anything to Babble about. Consciousness just is, period. That's not acceptable.
If we stick to the behaviourist view-point there is plenty to babble about! We know a lot about what consciousness does.

Consciousness (re)cognizes and identifies things.
We can explain how identification works well enough that we can make computer do it.
https://pjreddie.com/darknet/yolov2/

Consciousness classifies/categorizes things.
We can explain how classification works well enough that we can make computers do it with machine learning algorithms.

Consciousness has the ability to reason/logic.
We can understand and explain logic well enough to computers.

What you seem to be struggling with is the 1st vs 3rd person perspective. You want science to explain your experiences to you.

It can't do that.
That's exactly what I want, and I think Science will be able to do that someday.
Skepdick
Posts: 4777
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Skepdick »

SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:55 pm That's exactly what I want, and I think Science will be able to do that someday.
Do what? explain your experiences to you?

Are you cognisant of the fact that science can't explain anything TO YOU.

Science can only explain things to the scientist who has the background knowledge to interpret the explanation in context off all the concepts the scientist is familiar with and already accepts as true. Which is precisely the point I am making.

Nobody can explain quantum field theory TO YOU. Understanding QFT requires background knowledge.
Nobody can spoon-feed you this knowledge. You actually need to LEARN IT. All by yourself.

What you expect from science is a byte-sized answer that you can comprehend.
What if that's not possible? What if comprehension requires you to learn new things?

You seem to expect short inferential distances.
Last edited by Skepdick on Thu Jul 04, 2019 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 566
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko »

Skepdick wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:54 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: Thu Jul 04, 2019 3:41 pm It shows that there is something different about Consciousness. We don't even have anything to Babble about.
This is fundamentally your mistake. You think the explanation of consciousness can be produces in English and given the concepts you currently possess.

What if the 'explanation' for consciousness requires you to learn a new set of concepts/languages in order for you to comprehend it?

Like this: https://github.com/pjreddie/darknet
I expect that Science will adopt whatever Outside the Box methods are necessary to understand Consciousness. Not sure what the point of your Link was. Looks like an open source Neural Net package. Is it because it is a programming language rather than a spoken language? Ok it's an example of another kind of language.
Post Reply