Is consciousness just an illusion?
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39482345
Why no mention of Perception?
Because without perception, there is no sense of the world.
Sensory perception
Tau.Neutrino said:
Is consciousness just an illusion?
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39482345Why no mention of sensory Perception? Because without sensory perception, there is no sense of the world.
“The question is not can computers be human? But are humans really that clever?”
“Intuition is simply knowing something without knowing how you got there”
“From an evolutionary perspective, our ability to think is no different from our ability to digest”
“It isn’t so difficult to imagine how a machine made of a trillion moving parts might just be capable of being human”
“What we see on our computer screens is called the ‘user illusion’. Human consciousness is the brain’s ‘user illusion’ of itself”
Some interesting insights there.
When someone talks to me about ‘consciousness’, I always start with the difference between ‘consciousness’ and ‘unconsciousness’. With the above insight, ‘unconsciousness’ is just like a computer running with the screen switched off. In that case, sensory input from the keyboard (sight) is extremely limited or nonexistent. But sensory input from the microphone (sound) can still be used.
A person can be fooled by misprogramming (mental illness) or misdirecting (magic) the computer screen of consciousness.
> Why no mention of sensory Perception? Because without sensory perception, there is no sense of the world.
Sensory perception is a slightly different topic.
I see the development of the concept of ‘self’ in an individual as occurring through observing simultaneous sensory perception of events. Each time I see my hands clasped I feel my hands clasped, and conclude that ‘hands clasped’ is an event in the real world. Each time I scratch my right ear, I hear the sound and feel the touch, and conclude that ‘scratching right ear’ is an event in the real world. Some times when time I type a letter I feel pain in my finger, and conclude that my arthritis is playing up. Such events can, if I so wish it, appear on the computer screen of consciousness.
The article doesn’t address the question in the headline.
It addresses the question: is the human brain a mechanism that works without any mystical external entity?
The answer is, yes, of course it is, or to be more scientific, yes, it’s almost certain that it is.
Does that make consciousness an illusion? No it doesn’t. Consciousness is what it is, so if we are conscious of it then it is real.
Does that mean that conscious artificial brains are possible? Yes, why wouldn’t they be?
I don’t get the computer screen analogy at all at all.
I also don’t think we are anywhere near producing a computer with anything like our level of consciousness. Or even the level of consciousness of other mammals, but that is a guess, since we don’t know the level of consciousness of other mammals.
I think T.N’s comment about sensory perception is good. It’s an important part of consciousness.
ol’ dumb he did done read that’n
was just as thick afterward
my Lord intend I get nothin’ from
later on ‘ll ‘ave another look
I think consciousness is the sum total of every memory of sensory perception over ones life time of experience.
Sensory perception includes self awareness, learning new things, and feeling emotions.
Thinking about things relies on all past experiences all of which come from perception.
Sensory perception also includes dreaming, internalized perceptions, in dreams we see, hear, feel emotions, feel the external world.
Without sensory perception there would be no way to learn and no way to react to the external world.
Sensory perceptions are analog and the brain is analog so that whole process is continual.
The whole process can be defined as external environment (the World), perception, process of perception, memories of perception, reaction to perception, perception, external environment.
All those sensory perceptions that are remembered become memories, the process of sleep discards a lot of memories of perceptions that are not needed.
its interesting
Is consciousness just an illusion
I would say no
consciousness is real
but involves an analog awareness which is more complicated
I think, if ya get down to the nuts and bolts, self-awareness has to be a mechanism involved in homeostasis
Involved in maintaining the internal environment, and related involved in group homeostasis I guess (some larger organism/s, if ya chose to see it that way).
Conciousness maybe is, mostly that, awareness of the internal environment. There’s the day-to-day efforts at maintaining it. The home in ya head.
Does the mind generate a homely feel, yeah.
Is the sensory array for looking out configured to look in, I think so.
I have this weird sensation my eyeballs are bidirectional. Of course they aren’t, not really. But that’s the feel.
>Is consciousness just an illusion?
The article is just stating the obvious, but I wish they wouldn’t misuse the term “illusion” in this context. It’s not really an appropriate metaphor.
An illusion is a cognitive error. In other words it requires an observer. If consciousness itself is a cognitive error, who’s doing the observing?
Consciousness is what it is, it’s not a simulation of something else.
Bubblecar said:
>Is consciousness just an illusion?The article is just stating the obvious, but I wish they wouldn’t misuse the term “illusion” in this context. It’s not really an appropriate metaphor.
An illusion is a cognitive error. In other words it requires an observer. If consciousness itself is a cognitive error, who’s doing the observing?
Consciousness is what it is, it’s not a simulation of something else.
Well put.
>Consciousness is what it is, it’s not a simulation of something else.
it is though a representational conversion, injected with what minds do.
it’s all conversion, of representations of that external.
semantics
> I don’t get the computer screen analogy at all at all.
It took me a while to understand, but I do now.
What does a computer screen show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the computer. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the computer that it not shown on the computer screen. At best, the screen shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control the screen to show different aspects of what it happening inside the computer’s brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between the computer screen and the computer’s brain is a tenuous one, controlled by a program that decides whether the computer screen is active. The program controlling the computer screen is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. The screen could be blank while the computer is functioning normally, or it could be playing a screensaver or pre-recorded video rather than anything real time. The program that controls the screen could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
Do you get the analogy now? No? OK then I’ll spell it out, just replacing a few select words.
What does consciousness show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the brain. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the brain that we’re not aware of. At best, consciousness shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control consciousness to show different aspects of what it happening inside the brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between consciousness and the brain is a tenuous one, controlled by neural impulses that decide whether consciousness is active. The program controlling consciousness is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. Consciousness could be blank while the brain is functioning normally, or it could be playing a dream or memories rather than anything real time. The neural impulses that control consciousness could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
It’s quite a good analogy. No analogy should be pushed too far, but this one is rather good.
mollwollfumble said:
> I don’t get the computer screen analogy at all at all.It took me a while to understand, but I do now.
What does a computer screen show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the computer. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the computer that it not shown on the computer screen. At best, the screen shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control the screen to show different aspects of what it happening inside the computer’s brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between the computer screen and the computer’s brain is a tenuous one, controlled by a program that decides whether the computer screen is active. The program controlling the computer screen is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. The screen could be blank while the computer is functioning normally, or it could be playing a screensaver or pre-recorded video rather than anything real time. The program that controls the screen could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
Do you get the analogy now? No? OK then I’ll spell it out, just replacing a few select words.
What does consciousness show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the brain. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the brain that we’re not aware of. At best, consciousness shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control consciousness to show different aspects of what it happening inside the brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between consciousness and the brain is a tenuous one, controlled by neural impulses that decide whether consciousness is active. The program controlling consciousness is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. Consciousness could be blank while the brain is functioning normally, or it could be playing a dream or memories rather than anything real time. The neural impulses that control consciousness could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
It’s quite a good analogy. No analogy should be pushed too far, but this one is rather good.
Both can be affected by Malware that produces unwanted (?) actions
Cymek said:
> I don’t get the computer screen analogy at all at all.
Both can be affected by Malware that produces unwanted (?) actions
Exactly.
mollwollfumble said:
> I don’t get the computer screen analogy at all at all.It took me a while to understand, but I do now.
What does a computer screen show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the computer. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the computer that it not shown on the computer screen. At best, the screen shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control the screen to show different aspects of what it happening inside the computer’s brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between the computer screen and the computer’s brain is a tenuous one, controlled by a program that decides whether the computer screen is active. The program controlling the computer screen is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. The screen could be blank while the computer is functioning normally, or it could be playing a screensaver or pre-recorded video rather than anything real time. The program that controls the screen could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
Do you get the analogy now? No? OK then I’ll spell it out, just replacing a few select words.
What does consciousness show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the brain. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the brain that we’re not aware of. At best, consciousness shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control consciousness to show different aspects of what it happening inside the brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between consciousness and the brain is a tenuous one, controlled by neural impulses that decide whether consciousness is active. The program controlling consciousness is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. Consciousness could be blank while the brain is functioning normally, or it could be playing a dream or memories rather than anything real time. The neural impulses that control consciousness could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
It’s quite a good analogy. No analogy should be pushed too far, but this one is rather good.
mollwollfumble said:
> I don’t get the computer screen analogy at all at all.It took me a while to understand, but I do now.
What does a computer screen show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the computer. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the computer that it not shown on the computer screen. At best, the screen shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control the screen to show different aspects of what it happening inside the computer’s brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between the computer screen and the computer’s brain is a tenuous one, controlled by a program that decides whether the computer screen is active. The program controlling the computer screen is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. The screen could be blank while the computer is functioning normally, or it could be playing a screensaver or pre-recorded video rather than anything real time. The program that controls the screen could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
Do you get the analogy now? No? OK then I’ll spell it out, just replacing a few select words.
What does consciousness show? It could show a representation of what’s happening inside the brain. But how good a representation is it really? For starters, there’s always a lot going on inside the brain that we’re not aware of. At best, consciousness shows only a tiny fraction of what is really happening inside. Further, you can control consciousness to show different aspects of what it happening inside the brain, but in order to show new aspects it has to hide others. The link between consciousness and the brain is a tenuous one, controlled by neural impulses that decide whether consciousness is active. The program controlling consciousness is only a tiny, minuscule part of the computer’s total software load. Consciousness could be blank while the brain is functioning normally, or it could be playing a dream or memories rather than anything real time. The neural impulses that control consciousness could be corrupted, by a virus for example, producing delusions.
It’s quite a good analogy. No analogy should be pushed too far, but this one is rather good.
To expand on my previous post a little, the analogy does not seem at all good. It seems to me that animal consciousness has very little in common with a computer screen.
>To expand on my previous post a little, the analogy does not seem at all good. It seems to me that animal consciousness has very little in common with a computer screen
yeah i’m staying a couple metres back from the cliff of recursion. Some feel like they’re among the angels that way, but I think it’s the devil.