Definitions of Consciousness: The Poll

[Speakpigeon]

This is the poll promised about the definition of consciousness.

It includes ten options, the majority of which proposed by members, with a few more I added to cater for the variety of opinions typical of this forum.

One choice only is possible.

Choices are made public.

The definitions have been anonymised.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Ok, already three votes cast.

Come on lads, it's not that difficult.

We don't have all the time in the world and this is an important issue, I think.
EB

 

[DBT]

Have to go with what I myself have said.

Consciousness is the brain’s model of the world and self, made of sense awareness, memory, feelings of internal conditions, thoughts about external conditions, and the drive to act adaptively.

As an extremely brief outline - The mental activity of which a person is aware - I'd say also works.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Yes, I accept that several answers may look acceptable.

I guess the point is that even so they're not equivalent so you should be able to see one in particular as better.

I nearly selected a different answer myself from the one I proposed.

Sorry if this requires serious work.

I guess it should be good for your brain.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Only seven answers!

You must be kidding!!

Come on, people, let's not drag our feet, here!!!

It's about your own consciousness, for God's sake!!!!

This should be just so simple and intuitive to make up your mind about that!!!!!
EB

 

[The AntiChris]

What's the purpose of this definition?

Do you want an  Operational definition (i.e. one that enables unambiguous empirical testability)? Your other thread, which asks for scientific concepts of consciousnesss, suggests you're after an objectively testable concept.

If this is the case I'd say your second definition is the one that comes closest to fulfilling the objectively testable criterion.

 

[Speakpigeon]

What's the purpose of this definition?

That would be irrelevant as to the poll.

The question is: Which one of the eight definitions below fits your view of consciousness?

Seriously, I would have thought this question clear enough.

I assumed that people had their own view of consciousness, irrespective of the possible use of particular definitions. That's what I was interesting in. And I tried to collect a sample of definitions that could be regarded as reflecting a wide range of views, within reason.

In particular, I used the other thread to try and tease out what would be a reasonably articulate expression of a scientific perspective on consciousness, which I couldn't find anywhere, as explained in the OP.

Do you want an  Operational definition (i.e. one that enables unambiguous empirical testability)? Your other thread, which asks for scientific concepts of consciousnesss, suggests you're after an objectively testable concept.

The possible use or purpose of the definition is irrelevant here. This poll offers eight very different definitions and people are asked which one fits their view, not which one they think is operational for science.

If this is the case I'd say your second definition is the one that comes closest to fulfilling the objectively testable criterion.

The poll asks which one of the eight definitions provided fits your view of consciousness.
EB

 

[The AntiChris]

What's the purpose of this definition?

That would be irrelevant as to the poll.

Ok. Then what's the purpose of the poll?

I doubt that anyone has a single notion of what they mean by 'consciousness' - it will always be dependent on context.

In any event, in my view, any definition which doesn't enable unambiguous empirical testability is intellectually worthless - all you can do is talk forever about it without ever making any solid scientific use of it.

 

[Speakpigeon]

What's the purpose of this definition?

That would be irrelevant as to the poll.

Ok. Then what's the purpose of the poll?

I wanted to have a clearer idea of the range of ideas people have and a clearer idea of what scientifically minded people think.

I doubt that anyone has a single notion of what they mean by 'consciousness' - it will always be dependent on context.

The word 'consciousness' has several senses so, yes, depending on context, people will mean different things. However, as a property of the human mind, there's just one possibility. And then different people may have different conceptions of that kind of consciousness.

In any event, in my view, any definition which doesn't enable unambiguous empirical testability is intellectually worthless - all you can do is talk forever about it without ever making any solid scientific use of it.

Good. So, what's stopping you from voting accordingly?
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Voting "None of the above" rather than "Don't know" suggests to me that you must have some alternative definition in mind, however imperfect it may be.

So perhaps those who voted "None of the above" could reveal here what they think a better definition would look like?

Thank you.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Right, as we can all see, the result is somewhat disappointing. Too few voters.

Basically, we each voted for our own proposal, and then some.

I had hoped I could try a second round of voting on the two or three options most popular in the first round, but we're not even going to get there. Not one option got more than one vote! It's rather pathetic, I think.

I'll try to keep it alive for some more time but we would need a much bigger participation.

Still, I guess we can at least try to draw some tentative conclusions...

One possibility is that this forum has fewer scientifically-minded users than I initially thought it had.

Alternatively, assuming therefore enough scientifically-minded users, definitions maybe are couched in a language that only the author of the definition understands well enough to decide what to think of it. The language used is maybe too technical, too narrow, or possibly just too muddled.

Possibly, too, the topic is so very difficult that people need more time to think about it.

Also, one real possibility is that there isn't enough interest!

Or a combination of these.

Anyway, we can wait and see.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

For those who can't find a definition they like in those offered, thank you nonetheless to try and articulate here your own, or at least one that you could like.

And then, also vote "None of the above", to leave trace of your passage here.

And if you really don't know of any acceptable definition, thank you to vote "Don't know".
EB

 

[fromderinside]

"Johnny, let me show you", as she moved his hand so his pencil hovered over 'C' rather than 'A'.

 

[Speakpigeon]

"Johnny, let me show you", as she moved his hand so his pencil hovered over 'C' rather than 'A'.

Just stop being silly.


And since you're here, it would be a good idea for those who have contributed definitions to explain them or make them more explicit.

Just repeat your definition at the beginning of your post and add any consideration you think could help. No limitation, within reason.
EB

 

[starwater]

I voted for

Consciousness is the brain’s model of the world and self, made of sense awareness, memory, feelings of internal conditions, thoughts about external conditions, and the drive to act adaptatively.

This thread reminds me of an episode of Star Trek - Measure of a Man Data is told to shut down to transfer his mind and memories to a databank to try and figure out how to replicate him. The researcher says that he will restore him intact. Data does not agree and refuses. He resigns from star fleet in order to avoid the order. The counter argument is that he is not a sentient being and therefore property and will be forced. The ultimate issue became: does an android have sentience?

My question then is consciousness the same as Sentience? Or is it one aspect of consciousness?

 

[Speakpigeon]

My question then is consciousness the same as Sentience? Or is it one aspect of consciousness?

The poll is there to see what people think about that. I presume they must have their notion of consciousness. Only they will know what it is.

And, if they don't have a view on consciousness, they can still select "Don't know".
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Explicitation

Consciousness is knowledge of specific neuronal processes in the human brain.

I offered this as a physicalist version of my notion of consciousness.

Ultimately, as a conscious being, I know something. It can't be anything else but something my brain does. I certainly don't understand how this could work, but that's in a nutshell all the necessary conditions applying to consciousness as I see them. Consciousness can only be something like this.

And I believe it subsumes all other physicalist definitions, but in a more succinct form.

Only the notion of "knowledge" could possibly deter some pundits. But, knowledge it has to be as knowledge is obviously a necessary part of consciousness.
EB

 

[Kharakov]

"Johnny, let me show you", as she moved his hand so his pencil hovered over 'C' rather than 'A'.

The problem being is the objective consciousness experiencing you. Yes you, Franklin Delano Inside.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I voted "I don't know". Probably "None of the above" was better because I don't have a definition at all in terms of other words, but you said

Voting "None of the above" rather than "Don't know" suggests to me that you must have some alternative definition in mind, however imperfect it may be.

So perhaps those who voted "None of the above" could reveal here what they think a better definition would look like?

Thank you.
EB

, so voting "None of the above" might have given you a wrong impression. Then again, on second thought, I realize that voting "I don't know" also may give you a wrong impression, so let me try to clarify:

I do not have any definition of the word "consciousness" (in terms of other words, which is what this seems to be about). That applies to many of the words I use, especially if the definition is meant to capture the (or an) ordinary usage. Moreover, I don't think this is a personal problem I might have. Rather, I think there are at least many words that can't be defined in terms of other words without losing meaning (perhaps most words are like that), leaving aside synonyms. In particular, I do not think one could (in that sense) define "immoral", "pain", "ill", "affection", "pleasure", "good", etc., and it's unclear to me that "consciousness" can do better. I could provide ostensive definitions of those words, but that would not help you here.

Now, it's possible of course to give stipulative, operational definitions in order to do scientific research on one subject or another, but then, one would need to specify the goal. Since you asked for my definition and apparently aren't asking for an ostensive definition, my answer is that I have no definition. Maybe if you want a definition that does not capture the meaning but at least gives an idea of what it means, I might give it a shot. But I don't think that that would be of use in this context, given that you seem to be thinking about science (e.g., "One possibility is that this forum has fewer scientifically-minded users than I initially thought it had."), and my attempt to approximate the (or an) ordinary meaning would not yield anything scientifically usable.

 

[DBT]

Reduced to bare bones. Consciousness: a virtual world based on information from an external objective world being generated within a brain.