Sam Harris On Defining Consciousness

[Whateverist]

You know all this talk of sentient energy has me thinking of force from Star Wars.

[The Grand Nudger]

You'd think there would be a few more force choked people in a world filled with sentient energy, but no....no, always making our hands do the dirty work, and getting our brains thrown in jail for it. Fuckers.

[Whateverist]

It would be so cool to force choke some would be mugger. Now what you gonna do? Didn't think so.

[brewer]

It would be so cool to force choke some would be mugger.  Now what you gonna do?  Didn't think so.

Come on. If there were a force choke it would become part of a sex act. Ask David Carradine.

[AFTT47]

This talk has me scratching my head.

We understand chemistry and electromagnetism pretty well. But there is nothing in our entire sum of knowledge that suggests electrical discharges through a chemical medium should result in an aware entity. I mean, just look at that suggestion. It sounds like total fucking woo. What mechanism is behind that? We know of none.

Consciousness is a complete mystery. Trying to figure it out is like a cave man trying to figure out a tablet computer. The only meaningful experiment he could do would be to smash it with a rock. Then he could see its function relied on its physical integrity and might infer that the source of its ability lay within. Beyond that though, he wouldn't have a clue. That's where we seem to be with consciousness. We have enough information to assume it is a result of physical processes of the brain but we have no idea how. We just don't have a scientific explanation for it that fits within the framework of our knowledge. I assume we're missing a big piece of the puzzle. Any serious attempt at an explanation will have to wait until we have that missing knowledge.

[bennyboy]

^ +1

There is nothing like a mechanism, not even the faintest glimmer of one, about why matter is conscious. There is only assumption and narrative: "Oh, well, of course there's consciousness. That's what lets us run from lions," or whatever. Or: "Of course it's all just physics, it's all in the brain."

The problem is that consciousness, as in the experience of qualia, is completely woo. You can't see it or measure it. You can't establish whether a given system has it. In fact, to be philosophically honest, I cannot establish that it exists at all except as a label for my personal experiences.

[AFTT47]

^ +1

There is nothing like a mechanism, not even the faintest glimmer of one, about why matter is conscious.

Yup. The more I think about it, the more mysterious it seems. It's probably going to be something for future generations of scientists to figure out because our generation is missing something very basic. I have no idea what it is we're missing but it's definitely something. Unlike you (based on past threads) I believe there is plenty enough evidence for a physical origin of consciousness but as to how it works - we might as well talk about magic, non-corporeal life and The Force. We just don't have a freaking clue.

[robvalue]

I find this all very interesting even if it's mostly over my head

That's a good comment Rhonda that a good scienctist "never says never". I agree with the sentiment entirely, in theory.

However, the biggest barrier is solipsism though. It seems that I can genuinely never know that this is actually "reality" or that any other minds actually experience things anything like I do. It's the problem of confirmation: I have no independent observers to confer with.

How can this barrier ever come down? I genuinely don't know. It seems impossible. Any apparent disconnect from this reality into the "real reality" could still be part of this delusion.

To put it even more simply, how can I ever know I'm not dreaming? The answer to me seems to be that I can't, ever, for the same reasons.

I'm aware I'm using definitive language here which I don't like doing, but it seems like a logical barrier which will survive anything.

[The Grand Nudger]

^ +1

There is nothing like a mechanism, not even the faintest glimmer of one, about why matter is conscious.  There is only assumption and narrative: "Oh, well, of course there's consciousness.  That's what lets us run from lions," or whatever.  Or: "Of course it's all just physics, it's all in the brain."

The problem is that consciousness, as in the experience of qualia, is completely woo.  You can't see it or measure it.  You can't establish whether a given system has it.  In fact, to be philosophically honest, I cannot establish that it exists at all except as a label for my personal experiences.

I think that it might not be quite as woosome, or invisible as you're suggesting, instead...you are simply dissasitisfied with what we -do- see, what mechanisms do exist, what posssible routes to consciousness -aren't- woosome.  

There's really no problem with describing consciousness as "what lets us run away from the lions" except in that we might wish for it to be more (as you clearly do when you decide that consciousness is the experience of qualia). When's the last time the universe sought to satisfy our wishes, though? Conversely, what if it -is- woo......what if it doesn't actually exist....not even yours, qualia...I mean. The ghost in the machine. What does that change, where does that lead? Nothing, nowhere. I still don't see a problem, we're still running away from lions - the work is still being accomplished, there is still a demonstrable effect to investigate, and I'll still call that consciousness, even without qualia - which I already do...obviously.

I suppose an easy analogy I could make, about how this demand of qualia in order to accept consciousness seems to me. You've never seen a lion, and you demand that I bring you one...but, for some reason, you don;t think something can be a lion unless it's neon purple -that's how you imagine them to be, your mind suggests to you that lions are neon purple. I keep bringing you lions, tawny ones mostly, sometimes more exotic colors, but never a neon purple lion. Because of this, you decide that there are no lions. Perhaps, in the case of consciousness, as in the case of this neon purple lion, a little division would go a long way. After all, if you keep looking for something that may not be there, and using that absence to conclude that some -other- thing is also not present.....you're never going to find that other thing, no matter how many times it's set at your feet.

@ AFTT, there is -something- in our body of knowledge that suggests that......you're one of those somethings (of which, in truth...there appear to be a -great many-)......aren't you?

[Ben Davis]