RE: Quantum consciousness...
August 21, 2017 at 4:23 am
(This post was last modified: August 21, 2017 at 4:26 am by I_am_not_mafia.)
While Robert Epstein, the psychologist who wrote that article I posted didn't always make his argument particularly well, I think he is on the right track in pointing out the limitations of describing the brain as a machine. You need to see it in a historical context. Since computers became useful, scientists have been trying to describe the brain as a machine, but decreasingly so the more we understand how the brain actually works. I have read some truly painful papers from the 60's in this regard.
The brain is a self organising system. All evidence points to that and there is no reason to suggest that it isn't. There is absolutely no evidence of a non-corporeal soul directing the brain, and even if there was then that soul and the brain should together be considered a self organising system. Dendritic trees self organise. Neurons self-organise (e.g. habituation). Emotions can be understood in terms of self organisation. There is no reason to think that consciousness is any different.
The computational framework does not adequately explain self-organising systems. Natural scientists such as chemists, geologists and physicists do not describe naturally occurring self organising systems in terms of computation. A geologist will not describe how plate-tectonics push up mountains in terms of information theory. It is just not a useful concept for describing such things. Natural scientists understand self organising systems in terms of pressure, minimising the flow of free energy, settling into stable states, minimising entropy locally but maximising it globally and in terms of thermodynamic gradients.
Information theory was derived from the concept of entropy. It is a higher level of abstraction. What information processing is required for a snow flake to form? The brain is also a naturally occurring self organising system so why do we make a special case and describe that in terms of information flow and computation? Possibly because it is so complex and an information theoretic approach allows us to abstract over the details more. For example, you wouldn't describe a steam engine in terms of information theory but if you had millions of little steam engines all working together in a complex way then I can imagine how it would be useful. It is still an open question as to what stage an information theoretic / computational approach becomes useful and why.
Describing the brain in terms of computation may allow us to reason about what it is doing, but not why. For that you need to recognise what it fundamentally is and why it came about.
Khemikal, you misunderstood what I was saying about temporal sequence learning. I was not explaining consciousness in terms of temporal sequence learning (TSL). I was using TSL as an example of intelligence that can be seen to aid self organisation. My point was that consciousness should also be seen as a way of aiding self organisation. It is a product of the brain and that is what the brain does. The development of consciousness is after all part of the same arrow of time where complexity has increased since the Big Bang. I am not saying that unspecified complexity complexity explains consciousness, I am saying that the increase in complexity over time is the result of naturally occurring self organisation which happens because of the laws of thermodynamics. The development of consciousness is another step in this process that has been occurring since the Big Bang and which has continued on to give us societies and economies. Consciousness allows us to act more intelligently.
The brain is a self organising system. All evidence points to that and there is no reason to suggest that it isn't. There is absolutely no evidence of a non-corporeal soul directing the brain, and even if there was then that soul and the brain should together be considered a self organising system. Dendritic trees self organise. Neurons self-organise (e.g. habituation). Emotions can be understood in terms of self organisation. There is no reason to think that consciousness is any different.
The computational framework does not adequately explain self-organising systems. Natural scientists such as chemists, geologists and physicists do not describe naturally occurring self organising systems in terms of computation. A geologist will not describe how plate-tectonics push up mountains in terms of information theory. It is just not a useful concept for describing such things. Natural scientists understand self organising systems in terms of pressure, minimising the flow of free energy, settling into stable states, minimising entropy locally but maximising it globally and in terms of thermodynamic gradients.
Information theory was derived from the concept of entropy. It is a higher level of abstraction. What information processing is required for a snow flake to form? The brain is also a naturally occurring self organising system so why do we make a special case and describe that in terms of information flow and computation? Possibly because it is so complex and an information theoretic approach allows us to abstract over the details more. For example, you wouldn't describe a steam engine in terms of information theory but if you had millions of little steam engines all working together in a complex way then I can imagine how it would be useful. It is still an open question as to what stage an information theoretic / computational approach becomes useful and why.
Describing the brain in terms of computation may allow us to reason about what it is doing, but not why. For that you need to recognise what it fundamentally is and why it came about.
Khemikal, you misunderstood what I was saying about temporal sequence learning. I was not explaining consciousness in terms of temporal sequence learning (TSL). I was using TSL as an example of intelligence that can be seen to aid self organisation. My point was that consciousness should also be seen as a way of aiding self organisation. It is a product of the brain and that is what the brain does. The development of consciousness is after all part of the same arrow of time where complexity has increased since the Big Bang. I am not saying that unspecified complexity complexity explains consciousness, I am saying that the increase in complexity over time is the result of naturally occurring self organisation which happens because of the laws of thermodynamics. The development of consciousness is another step in this process that has been occurring since the Big Bang and which has continued on to give us societies and economies. Consciousness allows us to act more intelligently.
