God is found within beauty or, more importantly, harmony

Page 2 of 6 [ 94 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

25 Nov 2010, 1:37 am

This is textbook Quantum Mysticism. The argument you have made is that is that the quantum state is weird, conscious is weird; therefor the quantum state is conscious. There may be a link between the two, some have postulated the idea that consciousness requires quantum superposition or infer from the fact that anesthetic gases effect the brain in at a Quantum level that therefor consciousness exists at the quantum level. It does not however follow that the entire quantum level must be conscious.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

JNathanK
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,177

25 Nov 2010, 1:46 am

01001011 wrote:

JNathanK wrote:

I think its that the activity of electrons actually experience what we experience in a very elemental, basic form. Maybe when an electron in a close orbit to the nucleus, it experiences pure blue, or when its in an outer orbit it experiences pure red, and when its a free electron it experiences pure sadness or pure saltiness or whatever. ...and the experience by a human is ultimately a tapestry formed by the elemental experiences from the individual electrons that make up all the activity in the brain. This is where I'm coming from.
[\quote]

That is just your fantasy. Not fact.

Quote:

Staunch materialists will say that colors are labels for the signals produced in the brain that correlate to rods and cones in the eye that react to certain wave lengths of visible light.
...
The idea that consciousness is something that just spontaneously comes out of nowhere when a bunch of computer processes happen at one time doesn't really explain anything. It has to be built up from something. That's like saying gravitational fields just happen when a lot of mass occupies space. It doesn't explain anything. There has to be baser components to gravity.

Your whole 'argument' is nothing but making the baseless assertion that humans are conscious (without even defining what conscious means). Then you assert that everything are conscious.
Ironically that in turn defeats your whole argument. Namely, how the 'basic consciousness' explains 'human consciousness' as we know? How does your theory explain any more than strict law of physics, which does not assume any mysterious consciousness? Your whole idea of consciousness is empty.

How is it any more of a fantasy for me to say that the electro-magnetic activity of the brain, that science has said is linked to consciousness. has conscious properties intrinsically apart of it, any more than it is to say that matter has gravitational properties?

I thought I couldn't have been more clear what consciousness is, but let me reiterate. Its a phenomenon based in personal experience we undergo on a daily basis. Its the tapestry of experiential awareness an individual exists in and exists as on a daily basis, and its made up of the primary five senses, as well as the subconscious. What makes it distinct from the process properties of matter is that its experiential. You are conscious right now. You're not just an advanced machine taking in information and outputting it, but you are reading what I've typed to you on the screen, and these black symbols on this white background are being processed by your brain and filtered through your subconscious and invoking certain emotions and reactions based off of prior experiences stored in your memories that you experience as an entity. In other worlds, you're not a mere set of processes, but you also have awareness. That's what I mean by consciousness. Its the fact that something is aware at all and not just pure process.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

25 Nov 2010, 3:07 am

JNathanK wrote:

01001011 wrote:

JNathanK wrote:

Quote:

The obvious fact that consciousness is not continuous, is modified in many ways by all sorts of chemical substances and states of mind indicates it is an emerging property of high level interactions, not something basic like gravity or electromagnetism.

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

25 Nov 2010, 3:32 am

Sand wrote:

If you contend that it takes high level interactions in order for consciousness to occur, how do you deal with the present research by Stuart Hameroff that shows one does not need to have high level interactions in order to have consciousness? For example, one cannot prove that memory, planning and motor skills comprise consciousness, since the brain can do all these things without the need for conscious thought.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

01001011
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 991

25 Nov 2010, 4:37 am

JNathanK wrote:

There is a difference: one can observe how the behavior of an object is directly affected by gravity. We cannot observe the direct effect of consciousness on a rock.

Quote:

You are conscious right now. You're not just an advanced machine taking in information and outputting it, but you are reading what I've typed to you on the screen, and these black symbols on this white background are being processed by your brain and filtered through your subconscious and invoking certain emotions and reactions based off of prior experiences stored in your memories that you experience as an entity. In other worlds, you're not a mere set of processes, but you also have awareness. That's what I mean by consciousness. Its the fact that something is aware at all and not just pure process.

The problem is that our intuition of consciousness is very naive. There is no rigorous reason to think that we are conscious.

01001011
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Mar 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 991

25 Nov 2010, 4:41 am

91 wrote:

For example, one cannot prove that memory, planning and motor skills comprise consciousness, since the brain can do all these things without the need for conscious thought.

That is a very interesting point. Ever heard of the p-zombies of David Chalmers - 'a hypothetical being that is indistinguishable from a normal human being except that it lacks conscious experience' (from Wiki)?

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

25 Nov 2010, 4:54 am

01001011 wrote:

91 wrote:

For example, one cannot prove that memory, planning and motor skills comprise consciousness, since the brain can do all these things without the need for conscious thought.

Yeah, I saw a little bit about that in an interview Chalmers did with Robert Lawrence Kuhn.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Nov 2010, 5:09 am

01001011 wrote:

91 wrote:

For example, one cannot prove that memory, planning and motor skills comprise consciousness, since the brain can do all these things without the need for conscious thought.

How would we know that the p-zombie lacks consciousness? The impression of consciousness is internal and private.

ruveyn

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

25 Nov 2010, 5:14 am

ruveyn wrote:

01001011 wrote:

91 wrote:

For example, one cannot prove that memory, planning and motor skills comprise consciousness, since the brain can do all these things without the need for conscious thought.

How would we know that the p-zombie lacks consciousness? The impression of consciousness is internal and private.

ruveyn

The p-zombie is just a theoretical construct. Designed to separate through logic the nonessential elements of consciousness. Its designed in part to illustrate the hard problem of consciousness.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Nov 2010, 5:39 am

91 wrote:

The p-zombie is just a theoretical construct. Designed to separate through logic the nonessential elements of consciousness. Its designed in part to illustrate the hard problem of consciousness.

More to the point it illustrates the hard problem of ill formed hypotheses and lack of definition.

ruveyn

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

25 Nov 2010, 5:41 am

ruveyn wrote:

91 wrote:

The p-zombie is just a theoretical construct. Designed to separate through logic the nonessential elements of consciousness. Its designed in part to illustrate the hard problem of consciousness.

More to the point it illustrates the hard problem of ill formed hypotheses and lack of definition.

I have not an iota of evidence indicating whether anyone else in the world has a mind or not. I have plenty of evidence of neural activity in brains other than mine.

ruveyn

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

25 Nov 2010, 6:33 am

91 wrote:

Sand wrote:

If you believe a mind, any mind, is not a mechanism for high level interaction as opposed to a basic force like electromagnetic attraction or repulsion then we cannot converse sensibly.

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

25 Nov 2010, 7:01 am

Sand wrote:

If you believe a mind, any mind, is not a mechanism for high level interaction as opposed to a basic force like electromagnetic attraction or repulsion then we cannot converse sensibly.

The consciousness may exist as a basic force. I however, do not know enough on the subject to draw any sort of conclusion. You also seem to be blurring the distinction between mind and consciousness. One may be the product of the other (I have seen it argued either way) but there is no reason for suggesting that they must be conceptually the same thing. The p-zombie concept essentially seeks disproves that contention, by suggesting that a mind may objectively exist without requiring an internal subjective viewpoint.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

Guitar_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jun 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,152

25 Nov 2010, 7:56 am

JNathanK wrote:

I've heard beauty is within the eye of the beholder, but if something harmonizes with their frequency, that's where beauty is found. What harmonizes with one person's frequency might not harmonize with another, but its still a harmony. It isn't any kind of dissonance when something clicks with someone, even if what is clicking with them might be a disharmony to someone else. If we can all find a common harmonization (universal love for our fellow man and the universe). I think that's where our greatest potential lay at.

Because God made us special! Like my bracelet says!

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

25 Nov 2010, 8:08 am

91 wrote:

Sand wrote:

If you believe a mind, any mind, is not a mechanism for high level interaction as opposed to a basic force like electromagnetic attraction or repulsion then we cannot converse sensibly.

Your assumption that consciousness can exist without a very solid hunk of meat behind it is pure unfounded speculation in the realm of spooks and other nonsense.

91
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,063
Location: Australia

25 Nov 2010, 8:48 am

Sand wrote:

91 wrote:

Sand wrote:

If you believe a mind, any mind, is not a mechanism for high level interaction as opposed to a basic force like electromagnetic attraction or repulsion then we cannot converse sensibly.

Your assumption that consciousness can exist without a very solid hunk of meat behind it is pure unfounded speculation in the realm of spooks and other nonsense.

Since when did I assume that? Once again you put words in my mouth. I simply stated it was theoretically possible and I cited two quite prominent thinkers who have argued it. If you wish to argue that this contention is impossible; you need to demonstrate this. Otherwise you are just claiming to know more about the subject than the Direct of Centre for Consciousness at the Australian National University. There are critical arguments on the matter but for the most part the p-zombie concept remains useful for defining the hard problem of Consciousness .

My personal position in the debate is to wait for something more certain to emerge. Until then one cannot really make their mind up on the subject.

_________________
Life is real ! Life is earnest!
And the grave is not its goal ;
Dust thou art, to dust returnest,
Was not spoken of the soul.

Page 2 of 6 [ 94 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next

Jump to:

God is found within beauty or, more importantly, harmony Post Reply New Topic

God is found within beauty or, more importantly, harmony