Consciousness

[Speakpigeon]

That you are done just shows you don't understand much even when provided with detailed explanations.

You asked for my views, I've provided them, and look what you've done with that!

You choose to ignore arguments contrary to your views and use a pirouette to escape but it is still patent that you have just evaded my arguments. You think it's not obvious?
EB

Time is on my side here.

Your arguments are based on the notion that consciousness is an experience related to something, presumably the real world one believes.

What you call consciousness is clearly a post hoc situation since it is not possible for one to be aware of what is currently happening using material systems in a material world. That being the case all that remains is the belief that consciousness, er, experience is a predicted state of affairs at the current time arrived at by some unknown means. So you open the door to a imagined place where what is thought is an aura, a fluffy non material state where exists such as quale.

Not a bad attempt for those around 2400 years ago, but, not near what we know the way things are today. An attribute is a something attached to something larger, more complex, more substantial. A quale stands on its own. Yet, attribute, as I described it perfectly matches your qualia. Ask yourself why is that.

My answer for you would be "we've come a long way baby". The way we related feelings and appearances to things today is by associating them with first, the real physical thing, second, the transduced and communicated physical thing in our nervous system, and third, to magic. Unfortunately your default position is magic.

Dream on.
EB

 

[Rayschism]

We say we are conscious of things because we are.

If I were not conscious of a keyboard this could not go on.

- - - Updated - - -

In which case we would still be conscious, but the external world would not be what we think it is. Welcome to the forum.

Thanks.

Maybe we're the dream of the Dolphin?

We know what we are.

We are apes.

And do things as apes do them.

Actually evolution teaches us that we are homids, and that we are not apes, that both apes and humans have a common ancestor tyhat existed five to eight million years ago.

Calling an ape a hominid I think was some ape's idea.

But the truth is:

The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnᵻdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids, are a taxonomic family of primates that includes seven extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean and Sumatran orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, the human (and though not extant, the near-human ancestors and relatives (e.g., the Neanderthal)).[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae

We're not just apes, we're great apes.

A human is a member of the genus Homo, of which Homo sapiens is the only extant species, and within that Homo sapiens sapiens is the only surviving subspecies.

 

[fromderinside]

Dream on.
EB

No. that's what you are doing and I'm not a copy cat.

 

[untermensche]

A human is a member of the genus Homo, of which Homo sapiens is the only extant species, and within that Homo sapiens sapiens is the only surviving subspecies.

A human is a great ape.

And humans do things as apes do them.

 

[DBT]

Sorry, but you really don't have a clue. You need to stop. You are not doing yourself any favours.


Could certain frequencies of electromagnetic waves or radiation interfere with brain function?

Amir Raz, assistant professor of clinical neuroscience at Columbia University, offers the following answer.

'Definitely. Radiation is energy and research findings provide at least some information concerning how specific types may influence biological tissue, including that of the brain. In some cases the effect may be therapeutic. For example, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a technique used to induce a short-term interruption of normal activity in a relatively restricted area of the brain by rapidly changing a strong magnetic field near the area of interest. Mark George provided a nice account of TMS in the September 2003 issue of Scientific American. In it he described how head-mounted wire coils can deliver powerful yet evanescent magnetic pulses directly into focal brain regions to painlessly modulate neural activity by inducing minute electric currents. Clinically, TMS may be helpful in alleviating certain symptoms, including those of depression.''

The link like your ideas goes nowhere.

And that study does not seem to say one word about MRI.

It looks to be more hand waving from you.

So you completely miss the part (deliberately I'd say) about ''certain frequencies'' of EMR effecting brain function (which you denied) and go off on your own little strawman tangent that has nothing to do with the fact that certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation do effect brain function.

This is typical of your antics of denial. Please stop. For your own sake. It's making you look very, very bad. You do much better on social equality issues. You'd be better off sticking to that.

 

[untermensche]

The link like your ideas goes nowhere.

And that study does not seem to say one word about MRI.

It looks to be more hand waving from you.

So you completely miss the part (deliberately I'd say) about ''certain frequencies'' of EMR effecting brain function (which you denied) and go off on your own little strawman tangent that has nothing to do with the fact that certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation do effect brain function.

This is typical of your antics of denial. Please stop. For your own sake. It's making you look very, very bad. You do much better on social equality issues. You'd be better off sticking to that.

I said MRI, very powerful magnet fields, have no effect on consciousness.

This is a fact.

You are the fool denying it.

 

[Rayschism]

So you completely miss the part (deliberately I'd say) about ''certain frequencies'' of EMR effecting brain function (which you denied) and go off on your own little strawman tangent that has nothing to do with the fact that certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation do effect brain function.

This is typical of your antics of denial. Please stop. For your own sake. It's making you look very, very bad. You do much better on social equality issues. You'd be better off sticking to that.

I said MRI, very powerful magnet fields, have no effect on consciousness.

This is a fact.

You are the fool denying it.

Actually, no it is isn't.

Magnetic fields may be responsible for altering our perceptions so that it may feel like a ghostly haunting.

 

[untermensche]

I said MRI, very powerful magnet fields, have no effect on consciousness.

This is a fact.

You are the fool denying it.

Actually, no it is isn't.

Magnetic fields may be responsible for altering our perceptions so that it may feel like a ghostly haunting.

That is not an alteration of consciousness.

Consciousness is that which is aware of emotion, experiences emotion. It is not the emotion.

 

[Rayschism]

Actually, no it is isn't.

Magnetic fields may be responsible for altering our perceptions so that it may feel like a ghostly haunting.

That is not an alteration of consciousness.

Consciousness is that which is aware of emotion, experiences emotion. It is not the emotion.

So if we have no consciousness, we can't have emotion.

Shades of Schrodinger's cat.

 

[untermensche]

That is not an alteration of consciousness.

Consciousness is that which is aware of emotion, experiences emotion. It is not the emotion.

So if we have no consciousness, we can't have emotion.

Shades of Schrodinger's cat.

Doesn't make it an alteration of consciousness.

It is an alteration to something consciousness is experiencing.

 

[Rayschism]

So if we have no consciousness, we can't have emotion.

Shades of Schrodinger's cat.

Doesn't make it an alteration of consciousness.

It is an alteration to something consciousness is experiencing.

Meh. Sophistry.

 

[untermensche]

Doesn't make it an alteration of consciousness.

It is an alteration to something consciousness is experiencing.

Meh. Sophistry.

Some call explaining the way things are "sophistry".

You wonder what they want.

 

[ryan]

Actually, no it is isn't.

Magnetic fields may be responsible for altering our perceptions so that it may feel like a ghostly haunting.

That is not an alteration of consciousness.

Consciousness is that which is aware of emotion, experiences emotion. It is not the emotion.

This is an interesting way to think about consciousness. But it really leaves consciousness ineffective in any physical way. Are you reconsidering free will? I ask because, "that which is aware of ..." seems to only be a second/third person localized awareness of what a certain system (brain) of matter does.

 

[untermensche]

That is not an alteration of consciousness.

Consciousness is that which is aware of emotion, experiences emotion. It is not the emotion.

This is an interesting way to think about consciousness. But it really leaves consciousness ineffective in any physical way. Are you reconsidering free will? I ask because, "that which is aware of ..." seems to only be a second/third person localized awareness of what a certain system (brain) of matter does.

It doesn't leave consciousness anywhere.

It doesn't limit consciousness in any way.

Consciousness can still be an agent of action even if it is that which experiences emotion.

 

[ryan]

This is an interesting way to think about consciousness. But it really leaves consciousness ineffective in any physical way. Are you reconsidering free will? I ask because, "that which is aware of ..." seems to only be a second/third person localized awareness of what a certain system (brain) of matter does.

It doesn't leave consciousness anywhere.

It doesn't limit consciousness in any way.

Consciousness can still be an agent of action even if it is that which experiences emotion.

Okay, as long as it is more than just awareness because awareness alone is not the same property as any physical property.

 

[untermensche]

It doesn't leave consciousness anywhere.

It doesn't limit consciousness in any way.

Consciousness can still be an agent of action even if it is that which experiences emotion.

Okay, as long as it is more than just awareness because awareness alone is not the same property as any physical property.

We don't know that.

Consciousness looks to be a property of some aspect of neural activity.

That would make it a physical property.

"Physical" is another honorific word, like "real".

If it exists it is real and it is physical.

 

[ryan]

Okay, as long as it is more than just awareness because awareness alone is not the same property as any physical property.

We don't know that.

Consciousness looks to be a property of some aspect of neural activity.

That would make it a physical property.

"Physical" is another honorific word, like "real".

If it exists it is real and it is physical.

Based on the 4 fundamental forces and the Standard model, I think it's safe to define physical properties to be things that can be affected by like properties, and in turn affect other like properties; where all of these kinds of properties are varied only by a scalar quantity.

Now let's say we somehow identify awareness to be exactly localized to physical property P. But then if we say that P has another property of awareness, wouldn't we just say that there are 2 different properties that are locally/spatially related?

 

[fromderinside]

Humans are biological stones rolling down social psychological hills.

 

[untermensche]

We don't know that.

Consciousness looks to be a property of some aspect of neural activity.

That would make it a physical property.

"Physical" is another honorific word, like "real".

If it exists it is real and it is physical.

Based on the 4 fundamental forces and the Standard model, I think it's safe to define physical properties to be things that can be affected by like properties, and in turn affect other like properties; where all of these kinds of properties are varied only by a scalar quantity.

Now let's say we somehow identify awareness to be exactly localized to physical property P. But then if we say that P has another property of awareness, wouldn't we just say that there are 2 different properties that are locally/spatially related?

What does matter ultimately break down to in the standard model?

A bunch of probabilities?

Anything that can be touched?

In quantum mechanics, a boson (/ˈboʊsɒn/,[1] /ˈboʊzɒn/[2]) is a particle that follows Bose–Einstein statistics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boson

Viewed as a pure probability distribution, the Bose–Einstein distribution has found application in other fields:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose%E2%80%93Einstein_statistics

 

[ryan]

Based on the 4 fundamental forces and the Standard model, I think it's safe to define physical properties to be things that can be affected by like properties, and in turn affect other like properties; where all of these kinds of properties are varied only by a scalar quantity.

Now let's say we somehow identify awareness to be exactly localized to physical property P. But then if we say that P has another property of awareness, wouldn't we just say that there are 2 different properties that are locally/spatially related?

What does matter ultimately break down to in the standard model?

A bunch of probabilities?

Anything that can be touched?

In quantum mechanics, a boson (/ˈboʊsɒn/,[1] /ˈboʊzɒn/[2]) is a particle that follows Bose–Einstein statistics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boson

Viewed as a pure probability distribution, the Bose–Einstein distribution has found application in other fields:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose%E2%80%93Einstein_statistics

My point was that anything that is physical, or as you also put it "agent of action" is already a property. If we add awareness to it, then that's another property. So there would have to be at least two properties of one substance or just two different substances. Either way, one is not the other.