Unity of Self and Memory

[sayak83]

Maybe a little, but you have this kinda thing down!

Basically, it's that descriptions and observations - science - can apply to the objective but the subjective isn't really touched on. Can't be. Is that almost as clear as what you said?

Yes yes. . Its not a limitation of science per se, but of any observation. All observations are necessarily of one entity interacting with its surroundings, and hence illuminates the properties of that entity in relation to things other than itself. Properties of an entity that manifests in relation to interactions with its own self are always hidden. Thus the only hope there is to investigate how you relate to your own self through introspection/meditation etc. and then infer, based on your own self investigation, how other entities relate to their own selves.

 

[sayak83]

If an electron has a means for self-representation then we can ask the question...if not then maybe it is not a coherent question.

Its a coherent question. In the latter case, we would simply say that its nothing like being an electron.

 

[sayak83]

I don't think that it is at all necessary to find an "ever-present" neural-physical behavioral correlate to the self. The self is like the center of mass of an object...the center of mass just makes it easier for us to calculate the behavior of that mass. In a vector drawing of the object in motion an arrow will be drawn from the "center" of the object in the direction of net motion depending on the various forces applied. In the same way, our central self is a convenience for referencing this body as a relatively autonomous and somewhat free actor on the world stage at varying levels. Our brains support a range of voices more or less inter-coordinated in part based on that self-identified center.

What determines our uniqueness can be seen as pointed to without being defined as the following:

• Our personal name
• Our personal relationships
• Our cultural environment including rights and responsibilities
• Our personal experience including the sensory awareness of our bodies' position within the world we sense

In short all these things define that arrow which we continually re-interpret in ourselves and through the feedback from the environment and especially others like ourselves. We are, as Daniel Dennett has put it, the center of our own narrative gravity. And as anyone who has meditated can say we are constantly writing our own novels on a sub-conscious level.

Of course, this is an impersonal way to talk about one's self. Within the context of our evolutionary and cultural heritage we are given the privilege of referring to ourselves as equal individuals with unique and relevant experiences worth sharing. We talk about ourselves in the first person as a sort of social contract which says, "You have the right and privilege to assume you are important".

The question in the OP was about the unity of conscious awareness experience and how that comes to be.

 

[atanu]

Because "what it is like to be an electron" remains a coherent question even after we know every property of the electron as they pertain to the electron's interactions with the rest of the universe. How X relates to every thing else is determinable, but how X relates to X itself is indeterminable as any investigation you do reveals only something about that entity X interacting with something other than itself.

I will like to refer this to @Polymath257 and @sealchan for their comments. I hope that is not breaking some rule.

 

[atanu]

Well, from what we know so far, memory is stored in the sensitivities of neurons and their connections with other neurons.

if you are really interested in these questions, you might look at a recent book by Sapolsky (a researcher in this area) called 'Behave'. It is quite informative.

Thank you. I have purchased the kindle version "Behave: The biology of humans at our best and worst" and I will read it. But I must say that often, only a few pages into a book I find assertions that I cannot say are scientific and then I put that aside. If that happens with this book I will point out.

I find many of these authors begin with materialistic axiom/s, shutting off any alternative option. Whereas science through ages has lifted veil off the sensually perceived material paradigms, many of these authors do not even acknowledge that we know very little and the little that we know is representational. Honestly, I lose interest while going through such books that endlessly recount parameters of objects, neglecting to focus on the subject that sees/knows.

Okay. I will come back on 'Behave .....".

 

[Kirran]

Yes yes. . Its not a limitation of science per se, but of any observation. All observations are necessarily of one entity interacting with its surroundings, and hence illuminates the properties of that entity in relation to things other than itself. Properties of an entity that manifests in relation to interactions with its own self are always hidden. Thus the only hope there is to investigate how you relate to your own self through introspection/meditation etc. and then infer, based on your own self investigation, how other entities relate to their own selves.

What do you think of the possibility of direct experience of how other entities relate to themselves? Rather than inference, which needs must be an intellectual affair.

 

[sayak83]

What do you think of the possibility of direct experience of how other entities relate to themselves? Rather than inference, which needs must be an intellectual affair.

I don't see how its logically possible for Y to experience the experience X has of itself. The only way it could be possible is if X and Y share the same self at the deepest core level.... hmm

 

[atanu]

What do you think of the possibility of direct experience of how other entities relate to themselves? Rather than inference, which needs must be an intellectual affair.

Yeah. You know directly how I subjectively experience deep sleep.

 

[Kirran]

I don't see how its logically possible for Y to experience the experience X has of itself. The only way it could be possible is if X and Y share the same self at the deepest core level.... hmm

Hmm indeed!

I honestly haven't yet managed to see a way in which consciousness even could be multiple, or individual.

Yeah. You know directly how I subjectively experience deep sleep.

How do I know that?

 

[sealchan]

The question in the OP was about the unity of conscious awareness experience and how that comes to be.

The idea that consciousness IS a unity...that is, that consciousness as a quality or feature of our experience is experienced as a unity or a continuity is likely a tautology. Consciousness itself is a term which in it's most precise definition is both elusive and all-inclusive. Elusive because any concise definition seems circular. All-inclusive because each example such as the one given in the OP, is an example that stands in for any and all experiences of consciousness. Any cognition, any experience of truth or feeling or sensation...the set of all such conditions is consciousness. As such consciousness is a whole term like God or the Universe. It refers to the set of all things from which rationality cannot escape.

So what I call the problem of self-reference in rational systems applies. This is the problem of drawing rational, non-circular conclusions about something which includes a reference to the one who is trying to be rational.

So the claim to unity appears to be a given since there is nothing outside of the set of all things that could break this continuity.

Unity is, perhaps, a feature of the phenomenology of consciousness but it may not be a property drivable from the neural systems (where X relates to not X) involved with what we call consciousness.

 

[`mud]

hey Sealchan,
Cognizance is the awareness of consciousness,
But...too many beers, give's one a good night's sleep !

 

[`mud]

And unity of self, is the hangover the next morning !

 

[`mud]

And memory is the driving thought of not doing it again !

 

[atanu]

How do I know that?

Hmm ... You don't know. I also do not know. No one knows.

 

[atanu]

It's got to be in the brain because things like alzheimer's and head/brain injuries can cause memory loss.

Memory loss does not mean effacement of unity of self.

Also there is not a real unity of self as a majority of what goes on in the brain happens at the subconscious level. Conscious awareness only takes part in a very small portion of the brain. This is the "self". What happens at the subconscious level for the most part is a mystery to the conscious self.

The red and blue above contradict. We do come back from sleep with unity of self intact.

We are simply not aware of the physical process of memory storage. It's taken care of by the subconscious mind.

That is better.

 

[sealchan]

And memory is the driving thought of not doing it again !

Yes, to what extent is our sense of the unity of self a result our our perception that we are immersed in a world of cause and effect (too much beer, pass out, hangover) and to what extent is it a perception of our minds always being on like TV that is always on?

It is, in fact, these sorts of metaphors that are the constructors of our sense of experience. It is all very circular but by examining the metaphoric basis of our concepts we can tease out the various cognitions which underlie our sense of a continuous self.

 

[Kirran]

Hmm ... You don't know. I also do not know. No one knows.

Hey come on how come you said it then?

 

[atanu]

My thinking is that self is an organization of "voices" within the psyche that represents various perspectives. There are two ways these voices are organized...in relation to a powerful central voice or in a cooperative relationship with each other with distributed power. ....

True there are many voices but these voices never occur simultaneously. And then the question arises who sees and knows all the various voices?

 

[atanu]

Hey come on how come you said it then?

My wife endorses that she knows nothing in deep sleep. My daughter also. So, I assume that you also do not know anything in deep sleep.

 

[`mud]

Hearing voices here, is an immense problem in my thinking.
A `deep` `sleep` ? How `deep` is that `sleep`.
And as to the voices in that `sleep`, are there voices there,
or not anything audible also ? Is there beer involved ?
How old is your daughter ? How `deep` are those voices ?
OH...I'm getting silly here, aren't I, deep nap time !