RE: why do we enjoy poetry From the perspective of neuroscience?
January 7, 2019 at 5:58 pm
(This post was last modified: January 7, 2019 at 6:11 pm by bennyboy.)
(January 7, 2019 at 12:27 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:(January 7, 2019 at 12:20 pm)Dmitry1983 Wrote: By definition of p-zombie their behavior is identical to conscious humans. So from evolutionary point of view there is no need for subjective experience.
Okay, that simply shifts the question without altering the substance any. What evidence do you have that a p-zombie would have behavior identical to humans? If you're simply defining a being to existence, then I'm not impressed. That would be nothing more than an assertion that a being without consciousness could have the same behavior as a conscious being, and is little more than begging the question. I'm interested in what evidence you have that a consciousness serves no function that would differentiate the behavior of a p-zombie from that of a conscious human being. Simply assuming that it serves no such function is pointless.
There are no mental events that we know of that aren't correlates to physical functions, specifically the function of neurons as they collect information from the environment, process it, and output behaviors in response. In fact, there is no way that I know of to demonstrate that sentient mind even exists at all, in any configuration of matter or its properties.
But given that consciousness DOES exist, either it adds something that is not present in physical mechanism, or it does not. If it does, then the universe is not a physical monism-- it is dualistic at least, and evolution is not meant to describe the emergence of spirits or other immaterial quantities or properties AFAIK. If it does not, then it is a happenstance artifact, which makes evolution as an explanation useless.
I would tend, then, to view matter itself as intrinsically dualistic, which would mean that consciousness doesn't evolve any more than fundamental particles do, because they are inseparable-- it is only the forms which it takes which might be said to evolve.
As for evidence-- perhaps we should start by establishing what evidence we could take that demonstrates mind exists at all, anywhere in the Universe? Given any physical system, and asked "Does it really experience rather than just seeming to?" how would you establish which to be the case? In other words, how might I differentiate between a sentient being and a p-zombie? Because if I can't, I'm not studying mind at all-- but rather a collection of behaviors which I've assumed to represent mind-- and that would be begging the question in a pretty obvious way.