10
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by cosecantphi@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

I see this discussion come up a lot and it always results in arguments that I think maybe come about as a result of a lack of agreed upon definitions for certain terms, so I'll start there. Here are some definitions that make sense to me surrounding the hard problem of consciousness, would love to hear if anyone else has had the same thoughts:

Subjective experience:
Essentially the range of qualia that I can say exists because I experience them. It's the information you receive from your senses that is not quantifiable. For example, a description of the color red, no matter how detailed and scientifically accurate, will ever allow a person who has never experienced sight to understand what the color red looks like.

The mind and body:
The physical apparatus through which animals like us interact with the world. From the body we receive the necessary sensory information and nourishment to exert our will on the world. With the mind we interpret all sensory information gathered from the world.

Vast neural networks read, interpret, alter and conduct data received from the body's various sensory organs. Our brains begin this process with inherited patterns of basic cognition. Certain neural pathways calcify from repeated activity, forming memories: a catalogue of previous experiences we attribute importance to. Memories, guided by our upbringing, form a scaffold with which personality forms around, totally unique to the circumstances of any individual. But at no point in this fundamentally material process do we see the necessity for qualia, subjective experience. Theoretically, would a fully accurate computer simulated brain not also experience qualia if we know for a fact that we do?

The ongoing process described above is how most people would describe consciousness. We find that messing with certain parts of the brain can interrupt consciousness, and therefore memory formation, but how can we be sure that some fundamental sensation never ends, totally divorced from the body and mind?

People who get too drunk may not remember it later, but they were certainly conscious at the time. If there exists some feeling before conception and after death, no one can know because the dead can't speak and the living don't remember it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Sebrof@hexbear.net 3 points 4 months ago

Not exactly what you are discussing, but you might find this interesting if you haven't come across it before. Some fellow hexbearite posted it somewhere long ago. It discusses the idea of subjective continuity, the "always being-there" nature of subjectivity. There always being a subjective experience that we are all living through and after death simply move into a next instance of subjective experience. Similar to ideas of a mindstream in Buddhism.

https://www.naturalism.org/philosophy/death/death-nothingness-and-subjectivity

this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13545 readers
699 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS