I have returned. I briefly read the other thread concerning consciousness. It then got bogged down in some irrelevant stuff as well as the definition of consciousness. Somehow too, it has been implied that the unravelling of how the brain works will bring us closer and closer to knowing consciousness.

I do not think so. I think even if scientists have unravelled fully each atom of the brain, they with their consciousness will still wonder what is this consciousness!?

To those who keep tripping up on the definition of consciousness, it may be better phrased as:

"If one day scientists have unravelled the organic brain totally, will they be able to fully explain what exactly our thoughts, feelings, things we sense and our willing for things to be done(actions) are?"

My answer is no, other than if some philosopher's answer

You answer implies that there is some non-empirical nature to the human brain. Could you explain why you think science won't be able to explain things like this?

My hunch would be that some sort of fundamental particle is a carrier for consciousness in the same way that electrons are carriers for digital information. Maybe it is photons, or another fundamental, primary particle which we haven't discovered yet.

The brain wouldn't generate consciousness, but has evolved to capture it and use it to aid in survival. Same principle as eating food, but with energy instead of matter.

Think of it as a universal WiFi signal which we're all connecting too. We aren't linked together, but we all connect to the same broadcast node to do our individual browsing......gotta stop smoking weed.

(June 22, 2009 at 1:29 pm)Anto Kennedy Wrote: My hunch would be that some sort of fundamental particle is a carrier for consciousness in the same way that electrons are carriers for digital information. Maybe it is photons, or another fundamental, primary particle which we haven't discovered yet.

Sounds like wishful thinking to me (not much different from the daft way metaphysicists define mind as being in some way separate from the body/brain) ... the available evidence indicates that thought (including consciousness) is an electrochemical based phenomenon.

(June 22, 2009 at 1:29 pm)Anto Kennedy Wrote: The brain wouldn't generate consciousness, but has evolved to capture it and use it to aid in survival. Same principle as eating food, but with energy instead of matter.

Why?

(June 22, 2009 at 1:29 pm)Anto Kennedy Wrote: Think of it as a universal WiFi signal which we're all connecting too. We aren't linked together, but we all connect to the same broadcast node to do our individual browsing......gotta stop smoking weed.

Still sounds like hogwash to me.

Kyu

At the risk of stating the obvious, even if we have figured out all the atoms of the brain, each of us with consciousness will still be wondering, where on Earth is my thoughts?
We may be able to see how the elctrical impulses go from here to there, but you will still wonder where your thought is, wont it?

(June 22, 2009 at 12:06 pm)Tiberius Wrote: You answer implies that there is some non-empirical nature to the human brain. Could you explain why you think science won't be able to explain things like this?

---

I actually have a good idea. If this creature asks us what is all these, these thoughts and feelings etc. it will kind of prove it has consciousness, wont it?

(January 7, 2009 at 2:21 pm)Darwinian Wrote: Explain consciousness? Wow, that's a bigeee.
An organism does not need consciousness in order to be a success. I'm sure that given time we could create an artificial mind that could behave in a very similar way to ours. But would it be self aware? How would we ever know?

Emphrium Wrote:I actually have a good idea. If this creature asks us what is all these, these thoughts and feelings etc. it will kind of prove it has consciousness, wont it?

Nope.. It would only suggest that it appears to have conciousness.. For all I know, I'm the only being in the history of space and time that is truly conscious. Of course, you may have the same feeling about yourself.

Ephrium,

Hypothetically speaking - If science does in future; show 'where our thoughts are' with very strong evidence...then like any other matter in science that has very strong supporting evidence to back it up...doesn't that just give a very good reason to believe that's indeed...true? I mean that's what science does? You could think "That's not where they are" - but in this hypothetical case, where there's very strong evidence of the truth of it; you'd still have very good reason to believe it is where they are...right? So when you think "That's not where they are" - there's still very strong evidence that you're actually wrong...and that that is actually where they are located. Right?

EvF

(June 22, 2009 at 1:29 pm)Anto Kennedy Wrote: My hunch would be that some sort of fundamental particle is a carrier for consciousness in the same way that electrons are carriers for digital information. Maybe it is photons, or another fundamental, primary particle which we haven't discovered yet.

The brain wouldn't generate consciousness, but has evolved to capture it and use it to aid in survival. Same principle as eating food, but with energy instead of matter.

Think of it as a universal WiFi signal which we're all connecting too. We aren't linked together, but we all connect to the same broadcast node to do our individual browsing......gotta stop smoking weed.

Sounds like science fiction bullshit. Maybe its Gia. LOL

(June 23, 2009 at 5:18 pm)LEDO Wrote: Sounds like science fiction bullshit. Maybe its Gia. LOL

It sounded weird to me also, but then I smoked some weed, and it all made sense.

---

(June 23, 2009 at 12:36 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: Ephrium,

Hypothetically speaking - If science does in future; show 'where our thoughts are' with very strong evidence...then like any other matter in science thathas verystrongsupportingevidencetobackit up...doesn't thatjust givea verygoodreason to believe that's indeed...true? Imeanthat'swhat sciencedoes? Youcouldthink "That's not where they are" butinthishypotheticalcase, wherethere'svery strongevidence of the truth of it; you'dstillhaveverygoodreasontobelieveit is where they are...right? Sowhen you think "That's not where they are" - there'stillverystrongevidencethat you're actually wrong...andthatthatisactuallywheretheyarelocated. Right?

EvF

(June 23, 2009 at 4:06 am)Ephrium Wrote: At the risk of stating the obvious, even if we have figured out all the atoms of the brain, each of us with consciousness will still be wondering, where on Earth is my thoughts?
We may be able to see how the elctrical impulses go from here to there, but you will still wonder where your thought is, wont it?

Erm...you just contradicted yourself. Sure, we could still wonder where our thoughts are, but we'd know the answer as you just stated, if we knew about every atom in the brain, and all the electrical impulses, we'd know exactly how consciousness worked.