What is Consciousness?

[Twilight Hue]

Very well said. I think that 'consciousness' tends to be over complicated and cantilevered into all manner of strange notions in order to justify a suite of traditional religious notions.

Pretty much. Consciousness is easily manipulated in varying degrees making It an emergent property of living matter.

Its certainly not some pervasive encompassing cosmic pool of enlightenment or something.

Sounds cool though. *Grin*

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Consciousness therefore is no more than a complex form of interaction, or a combination of several complex interactions working together, which evolved over millions of years from much simpler forms of interaction. Of course this is an extremely simplified explanation, but it really doesn't take a novel to explain what consciousness is.

What then was the first interaction that took place and at what level of cosmic existence?

 

[Nakosis]

What do you mean by "physical?" Are immaterial forces physical? What about immaterial causal links between space-like separated systems? Also, even granting the basically universally held view among specialists that consciousness and cognition reduce to neural activity, that doesn't mean that the word or corresponding concept "chair" or "computer" or whatever does. It doesn't (that is, there is a neurophysiological basis for concepts but no one-to-one correspondence between discrete thoughts or concepts either in use or some form of memory/representation).

This is a good question.

It seems physical means it can be measured. It interacts with something else and that interaction can be measured. So a materialist presumes anything that exists can be measured. If it is measurable, it's physical.

Current, voltage are forces which are physical. We can observe how they interact with other physical things and measure them because of that interaction. Doesn't really say anything about it other than we have developed a process which can measure it's interaction in a consistent manner.

Is consciousness physical? A materialist assumes that if it exists, it can be measured. Maybe not now but at some point we will be able to define it's properties and be able to measure it's interaction with other physical things.

I'm not sure I actually disagree with that. Maybe at some point we will be able to define consciousness and be able to measure it. This is all that is necessary for it to be physical.

I think the problem still faced is in defining consciousness.

 

[Nakosis]

Consciousness is not a mystical, inexplicable thing, nor is it the ground of all being, nor is it a fundamental property of the universe. It is described as the ability to be aware or have feelings, emotions, senses, but that doesn’t really explain what specifically it is or what causes it from a physical standpoint. This is my explanation… From a physical standpoint, consciousness is the ability to interact with our environment in a complex manner.

This makes it physical. We only need to measure this interaction.

Everything interacts with the environment in some way, even rocks and plants. The ability for energy forms to interact and change form is fundamental to all of existence. That is why we have such thing as the Fundamental Interactions. Interaction is the fundamental driving force behind our universe, not consciousness.

Interaction only allows us to measure whatever it is that we are defining. At best it is a property of what we are defining. For example I can measure 120 volts. That is a property of what I am measuring. There are many other properties we can measure with EMF. Because of this we can predict and control EMF. Still it'd be a mistake to confuse what we measure with the essence of EMF.

In the case of consciousness, we can measure brain activity and define certain brain activity as consciousness. We can agree that if it is measurable, if physical. Still it'd be a mistake I think to assume that what is being measured is anything more than a property of consciousness. We've defined a property of it but not the essence of it.

A rock or tree interacts with its surroundings, but what makes something “conscious” however, is the complexity of those interactions. A human interacts in a far more complex manner than a tree or a rock. Humans interact with the environment in a number of ways…light, sound, touch, taste, smell, etc… A rock interacts with its environment also, but on a much more basic level. Consciousness therefore is no more than a complex form of interaction, or a combination of several complex interactions working together, which evolved over millions of years from much simpler forms of interaction. Of course this is an extremely simplified explanation, but it really doesn't take a novel to explain what consciousness is.

This just means there are many properties to define and measure with regard to human consciousness. And to some degree we can learn to predict and control it, still this doesn't mean we have defined or understood the essence of it.

 

[George-ananda]

LegionOnomaMoi, so then it can be said that though not proven scientifically, it is a reasonable possibility for non-physical phenomena such as ghosts, apparitions, etc...to emerge from physical forms? If other non-physical phenomena can emerge, then why not spirits of the deceased?

I believe in so-called ghosts also but look at it a little differently than you. I heard a talk from physicist Amit Goswami that made some sense of this to me. He talked that we western people traditionally think in terms of upward causation as you are doing here; the physical produces a ghost. The grosser level (physical) causes the more subtle level (ghost). That is typical upwards causation; the physical creates the subtle. Goswami says we have it all reversed and causation is downward. The subtle produces the gross. Consciousness (which is beyond even the subtlest material level) creates everything from the subtle down to the physical. So in this view the subtle incarnates in more gross levels. When the gross level falls off (death) the more subtle remains (spiritual/ghost level; which actually preceded the physical in the first place.).

 

[outhouse]

Its qualia that seems mysterious.

That's true.

Its a vague definition that leaves wiggle room for a philosophical application.

 

[outhouse]

Consciousness is ONLY the product of the brain. It factually does not exist outside the brain at this time, and no evidence at all points differently.

With modern advancements in technology, we can actually see questions answered in the brain before the test subject even knows the answer.

When a computer is unplugged it no longer can compute, the brain is 100% every bit the same.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Nakosis, I agree with all that you said. I have a hard time with LegionOnomaMoi's questions because I have a pretty non-complex view of these things comparatively. I think you answered those questions better that I could ever have.

 

[Runewolf1973]

As an animist, when I observe nature I see energy, interaction, and complexity, that's all.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Consciousness is ONLY the product of the brain. It factually does not exist outside the brain at this time, and no evidence at all points differently.

With modern advancements in technology, we can actually see questions answered in the brain before the test subject even knows the answer.

When a computer is unplugged it no longer can compute, the brain is 100% every bit the same.

This is true and that is because when that "computer" is unplugged that interaction is no longer the same.

 

[outhouse]

Nakosis, I agree with all that you said

Agreed.

I feel the mistake many others make is when they over attribute the definition of what consciousness is into the point of substantiated rhetoric.

When the brain is damaged, factually so is consciousness to different extents.

 

[outhouse]

This is true and that is because when that "computer" is unplugged that interaction is no longer the same.

Exactly.

And not just the same, completely shut off. With no power, no information can be processed at all. which is true of a PC and a brain.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Exactly.

And not just the same, completely shut off. With no power, no information can be processed at all. which is true of a PC and a brain.

The only difference in opinion here may be that I don't see that power (energy) as ever being completely shut off. The interaction changes and the energy is converted into another form. There is no reason to assume that form is "supernatural" however. Other than that minor difference of opinion, I do agree with everything you've said.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But when and where did the first interactions that lead to what you observe as consciousness occur?

 

[Runewolf1973]

But when and where did the first interactions that lead to what you observe as consciousness occur?

My opinon is there always has been and always will be interaction of some sort. It didn't start anywhere, it always has been. Without interaction in some manner there would be nothing. I would say the first interactions resembling consciousness occured in some of the earliest primitive creatures on Earth as a self defence mechanism.

 

[Yerda]

By `consciousness' I simply mean those subjective states of sentience or awareness that begin when one awakes in the morning from a dreamless sleep and continue throughout the day until one goes to sleep at night or falls into a coma, or dies, or otherwise becomes, as one would say, `unconscious'.

Source: http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Papers/Py104/searle.prob.html

That works for me.

Edit: Though Searle, and me, still find consciousness to be inherently mysterious.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Mystery-Consciousness-John-Searle/dp/1862071225

 

[Unification]

I find it kind of funny when people talk about "consciousness" as though it were something so mysterious, compelling and inexplicable, but that's just me...

Consciousness is not a mystical, inexplicable thing, nor is it the ground of all being, nor is it a fundamental property of the universe. It is described as the ability to be aware or have feelings, emotions, senses, but that doesn’t really explain what specifically it is or what causes it from a physical standpoint. This is my explanation… From a physical standpoint, consciousness is the ability to interact with our environment in a complex manner. Everything interacts with the environment in some way, even rocks and plants. The ability for energy forms to interact and change form is fundamental to all of existence. That is why we have such thing as the Fundamental Interactions. Interaction is the fundamental driving force behind our universe, not consciousness. A rock or tree interacts with its surroundings, but what makes something “conscious” however, is the complexity of those interactions. A human interacts in a far more complex manner than a tree or a rock. Humans interact with the environment in a number of ways…light, sound, touch, taste, smell, etc… A rock interacts with its environment also, but on a much more basic level. Consciousness therefore is no more than a complex form of interaction, or a combination of several complex interactions working together, which evolved over millions of years from much simpler forms of interaction. Of course this is an extremely simplified explanation, but it really doesn't take a novel to explain what consciousness is.

Well said from that perspective. My only problem with that, is that human consciousness has the capability to defy all physical fundamental rules and laws as our physical bodies and brains would not be exempt from those laws and rules, being all material. The mind can exceed those boundaries. No matter how many complex combination of interactions, or how much time... Everything ever thought of, imagined, dreamed of would have to be all true and there would be no such thing as a lie or anything false within those boundaries, laws, and rules. The universe, or cosmos, in which we were made from, would also have to be as conscious and alive as we were complexity wise.

 

[Runewolf1973]

Well said from that perspective. My only problem with that, is that human consciousness has the capability to defy all physical fundamental rules and laws as our physical bodies and brains would not be exempt from those laws and rules, being all material. The mind can exceed those boundaries. No matter how many complex combination of interactions, or how much time... Everything ever thought of, imagined, dreamed of would have to be all true and there would be no such thing as a lie or anything false within those boundaries, laws, and rules. The universe, or cosmos, in which we were made from, would also have to be as conscious and alive as were were complexity wise.

I believe our understanding of the universe is quite limited.

 

[outhouse]

But when and where did the first interactions that lead to what you observe as consciousness occur?

It evolved from very crude and simple forms and developed as a means of survival by mean of the brains evolution.

Much the way eye's evolved from light receptors, into something so complex as an eagles eye.

This is factual.

 

[outhouse]

I believe our understanding of the universe is quite limited.

While we are in our infancy, our combined knowledge is quite vast.