Consciousness question

[HypnoPsi]

How exactly have you determined that the temporal cortex produces consciousness?

It allows internal dialogue. Sorry for the confusion.

Well, Broca's and Wernicke's areas are certainly involved in processing language (but so are other parts of the brain). However, concentrating on the left temporal lobe, how does this generate internal experience?

So you're saying that many (but not all) lower life forms are all non-conscious p-zombies?

No.

Okay. Now what about non-life forms. Toilet cisterns? Thermostats? What's the minimum conscious system?

Actually, I wrote an cognitive modelling program many years ago at Uni that did just that. In a conversational manner, it asked the user what musicians they liked from a selection of artists and music and then determined how much they liked, rock, folk, pop, etc.,. It would be very easy for a professional programmer to include the question "would you like to hear artist X, just now" and then trigger media player, making the programme spontanious as well as interactive and capable of learning. But I don't see why that should make me think it's conscious.

Because it isn't. However, if the program decided to write lines of code in the program to tell itself that the second musician it interacted with was likeable in some fashion, and then used those new lines of program to prefer the second musicians answers, and then use those answers to bias the recommendations of music to other artist because of the input from the second musician who used the program, now you're moving towards consciousness.

How did you determine this as the minimum complex system necessary to produce consciousness?

(And I think you should read my description again. My program didn't interact with musicians, it just asked people what kind of music/musicians they liked and then decided whether or not they liked folk, rock, pop, etc.,.)

What do you have to say on the subject of a toilet cistern and a thermostat - specifically, yes or no, are they conscious at all in you view?
_
HypnoPsi

 

[PixyMisa]

What is the mechanism by which information processing produces conscious awareness of that information processing and/or the result of such information processing?

Already answered.

Define this reflection of yours?

Already answered.

What's the minimum reflective system?

Already answeed.

Do you agree with Dennett that a thermostat is conscious?

Already answered.

What about a toilet cistern? How have you determined that the above list is required to produce consciousness

I've explained the requirements for consciousness, whether under Dennett's definition or under a definition requiring self-awareness. There is no reason for me to determine for you whether each an infinite list of objects is or is not conscious. You have the tools, you work it out.

Okay, what about a completely mechanical calculator with cogs and wheels that can hold a constant in memory.

See above.

Which of the following are conscious:

See above.

 

[cpolk]

I'll answer your questions, but we're going to have to come to an agreement at some point on a definition of "consciousness".

I am quite aware that you are not suggesting that a toilet is aware of what is being flushed.

Of course not; that was actually the point I was making.

But, let me be completely clear, you actually believe that a cock-and-ball toilet cistern is consciously aware (at some rudimentary level) that it's either full of water or empty, right?

If it were not aware of the tank water level and pressure, how would it refill when necessary?

The term "consciously aware" is redundant, isn't it?

So you think that being "alive" is also necessary for consciousness? Yes or no?

No.

What defines life exactly? Is a virus alive? What about a computer virus?

Completely irrelevant.

Your turn. Give me your definition and measure of consciousness.

 

[HypnoPsi]

HypnoPsi,

What evidence do you have that we humans have consciousness, because everyone else might be p-zombies, and you wouldn't know the difference?

What evidence do you have one way or another?

None whatsoever. All I do know is that we are born as and function as touchy-feely, sensory, interactive and communicative beings. If solipsism should be our default condition then we're all wrong.
_
HypnoPsi

 

[Dark Jaguar]

It's all about the "channeling" of electronic particles/charges, in my opinion.

And what is it specifically that tells the sun how to "behave" like the sun if, not some form of information process?

It simply performs as it does. It doesn't need a information process to inform it.

Again, I have to ask you one VERY important question. If you can provide an answer to it, you will see the problem with your thinking.

You say a higher realm is what tells our universe how to function. What tells that higher realm how to function? I really want to know your answer to that.

 

[Dark Jaguar]

None whatsoever. All I do know is that we are born as and function as touchy-feely, sensory, interactive and communicative beings. If solipsism should be our default condition then we're all wrong.
_
HypnoPsi

And here's the thing, there is more than enough evidence that everyone else is not a p-zombie (an illogical construct as it may be). Namely, everyone else responds exactly as you do. If you tickle them, they laugh . This is not absolute proof, but science HAS NO ABSOLUTE PROOF OF ANYTHING. All that can be said is there is so much evidence against solipsism that to hold any other position would be illogical.

 

[HypnoPsi]

I am not denying anything about experience. I am simply not adding the explanatory fiction layer that you are.

I'm not adding anything at all. I'm just asking you guys to explain the simplest system that generates consciousness and that's it.

It's a simple series of yes or no questions about thermostats, thermometers, cisterns and micetraps. That's it. Then we can have some more fun as you try to explain why you think certain systems are conscious and why other systems aren't, which I know you're all really looking forward to.
_
HypnoPsi

 

[cpolk]

And here's the thing, there is more than enough evidence that everyone else is not a p-zombie (an illogical construct as it may be). Namely, everyone else responds exactly as you do. If you tickle them, they laugh . This is not absolute proof, but science HAS NO ABSOLUTE PROOF OF ANYTHING. All that can be said is there is so much evidence against solipsism that to hold any other position would be illogical.

That's the point I've been making, although probably with a slightly different view of the term "consciousness". We do what the human body is capable of doing. Making a "choice" is an action, not a "holy, paranormal phenomenon" passed down by the Gods. We have the ability to make choices because our brain contains the function to perform that action; it is programmed to do that. That is psychology.

Toilets, thermostats, whatever, also perform certain functions, and their mechanisms are aware (conscious) of whether or not the conditions are met to perform them.

They can't think for the same reason that I can't flap my arms and fly - they can only do what their design permits them to do.

 

[Mercutio]

I'm not adding anything at all. I'm just asking you guys to explain the simplest system that generates consciousness and that's it.

Yes, you are adding something. You are asking how something "generates consciousness", when these definitions "are consciousness". "Generates" implies something more than what is there. There is not merely seeing the tree, there is "awareness" of the tree, or other similar words. The consciousness Pixy is describing for you is perfectly adequate to describe my experience with the world and with my thinking. Rather than saying that I am eliminating something, you should be justifying the phrase "generates consciousness", and the semantic a priori assumption that it is something that needs to be generated in the first place. The evidence strongly supports the idea that it is the assumptions in your question that prohibit it from an answer that satisfies you.

 

[HypnoPsi]

How does conscious awareness arise from information processing?

Information is gathered, processed, stored, and used to create assumptions, which when tested, creates new information that will be stored and processed to create more new assumptions. You use the term "I" to designate your position according to your surroundings.

So what is the minimum conscious system that you can think of? Just one example will do. Thermostats, toilet cisterns? Conscious? Yes or no?

Panpsychism does not mean "psychic abilities" it means "all is psyche (mind/consciousness)"

Sounds like woo to me.

Oh yeah, right. And imbuing a cistern and/or thermostat with consciousness, no matter how rudimentary or limited, seems rational????

"Internal experiences" are things like blood running through our veins and breathing during our sleep. Are you talking about your emotions? Those are caused by, and can be altered by, chemicals. They are caused by internal processes reacting to stimuli; you "feel" excited because your heart is racing, not the other way around.

Right now, I'm having the internal experience of the word: "LUNATICS!!!". Why am I aware that I think you're all completely nuts?

It has to have some awareness of whether or not the tank is empty, otherwise the mechanism would not work.

So your answer is yes, you really believe that a cock-and-ball toilet cistern is consciously aware?

I ask you this - unless the mechanism is aware that there is something there, how will the trap spring?

A mousetrap works by simple mechanics! Kinetic, strain and potential energy are all involved, yes. But I see absolutely no reason to think the mousetrap "aware"?

Is a safety-pin conscious? I'm looking for comparisons here.

It must be aware, it must be conscious, of whether or not the conditions are in place for the mechanism to react. Otherwise, the mechanism would have no reason to react.

Are you talking about a mousetrap or a cistern here?

I don't see why these mechanisms need any "reasons" to react at all. I think they work by mechanics and nothing more. To me, as with the moustrap, a water cistern is nothing more than a mechanical see-saw with an airball on one end and a plug on the other. One goes up and the other goes down plugging and unplugging the water pipe as appropriate.
_
HypnoPsi

 

[HypnoPsi]

A baby human will giggle while swallowing poison; an adult human will know better. Is the adult human more "conscious", because it can do things the baby can't? Is "consciousness", like speech and mobility, therefore something that is learned? Or is it merely knowing, based on design, when conditions are met for a mechanism to react? Does your comparison of a toilet to a mouse trap work when we apply it to differing stages of human development?

If you are referring to our ability to evaluate a situation before we act, then are you saying that's what a toilet cistern does?

What's your most basic real-world example of a conscious system?
_
HypnoPsi

 

[HypnoPsi]

Why?

You see other options? We have a universe and we have consciousness.... it's either one or the other as cause or some third cause.

Or are you saying we should just assume the physical creates consciousness?

What's your minimum real-world conscious system?

Thermostat?

Cistern?

Thermometer?

Mousetrap?

Which are conscious?
_
HypnoPsi

 

[cpolk]

For the sake of bringing us together, please make changes to these definitons that will help clarify this discussion.

Intelligence - the ability to draw correlations between unrelated objects and/or functions, even if those correlations are only assumed.

Education - Appliable knowledge of existing functions.

Learning - Creating new objects and/or functions by testing existing assumptions.

Consciousness - Ability to determine whether or not conditions are met to cause reaction based on function.

 

[HypnoPsi]

So far we've had a couple of people say that thermostats are conscious but not thermometers for reasons that don't seem entirely logical.

If you don't think the reasons are logical, you need to state why.

Well, for a start. A the mercury/alcohol in a thermometer on it's own still displaces the glass tube and the air around it. The only difference with a thermostat is that it's thermemeter displaces a pressure gauge that turns the central heating off or on. In both cases the air pressure results in the displacement of physical matter. What exactly is supposed to be creating consciousness here? Why one and not the other?
_
HypnoPsi

 

[cpolk]

So what is the minimum conscious system that you can think of? Just one example will do. Thermostats, toilet cisterns? Conscious? Yes or no?

I don't have a system or measurement - either it is aware of whether or not the conditions are met to function, or it isn't. If it is not, then it is malfunctional.

Your turn. What is your definition and scale of awareness?

Oh yeah, right. And imbuing a cistern and/or thermostat with consciousness, no matter how rudimentary or limited, seems rational????

If the tank cannot determine whether or not it is full, which is essential to its function, how can it function? This does not mean it has the ability to be intelligent or to learn or that it "thinks".

I don't see why these mechanisms need any "reasons" to react at all. I think they work by mechanics and nothing more. To me, as with the moustrap, a water cistern is nothing more than a mechanical see-saw with an airball on one end and a plug on the other. One goes up and the other goes down plugging and unplugging the water pipe as appropriate.

You do not have to reaffirm that the human body is a much more complex system than your toilet. We have already established that.

I'm still waiting on your definition and scale so that we can get on the "same page".

 

[HypnoPsi]

Bear with me, because I think I know where we're going now. You are confusiong "psychology" with "consciousness".

Nope. I do think that cognition is a factor in consciousness but I don't think it's exactly the same thing.

Your question: Is the toilet conscious of the water in its tank?

My answer: Yes, it is. It's mechanisms are aware of the water level and pressure and act accordingly.

How can someone who believes that toilets can be conscious ever justifiably think that anyone elses beliefs are "woo"?

Your intended question: Does my toilet "choose" to refill itself?

I can say with absolute honestly and complete sincerity that I have never even considered the idea of a toilet "choosing" to refill itself. Neither, have I ever assumed anyone would believe such a thing. The idea that a toilet cistern is conscious is barmy enough.

My answer: No, it is merely reacting. It does not have a brain, therefore does not have psychology, and therefore cannot perform the action of "choosing" as part of its function.

Uh huh..

Nevertheless, it is still conscious of whether or not the tank is full.

Have you ever been on psychiatric medication?
_
HypnoPsi

 

[cpolk]

sorry! repeated posts.

 

[HypnoPsi]

A cock-and-ball cistern processes information. So does a mousetrap. But only one of them automatically resets. Are one or both conscious? What is your minimum system required for the generation of consciousness?

Already answered.

Remind me? You think that cisterns and thermostats are conscious but not thermometers and mousetraps, yes?

Do you have any other examples?
_
HypnoPsi

 

[Iacchus]

It simply performs as it does. It doesn't need a information process to inform it.

Yes, as does everything else ... and, there is no such thing as cause-and-effect. What do you mean?

 

[Iacchus]

Again, I have to ask you one VERY important question. If you can provide an answer to it, you will see the problem with your thinking.

You say a higher realm is what tells our universe how to function. What tells that higher realm how to function? I really want to know your answer to that.

Why? How many "eternities" do you think is necessary? I think one should suffice just nicely.