Consciousness in my words would be defined as mentally capable of understanding one’s own physical surroundings and one’s sentiments. Any living organism with a brain that has a desire and the aptitude to survive should possess a certain degree of consciousness. Are plants and trees conscious? If so, then perhaps a brain isn’t necessary after all.
First off, if you haven’t read the book Flatland, it is a short and VERY intriguing read.
My belief is that there are many dimensions we exist on and many we do not exist on and many we exist on that we communicate on but there is sensory perception we do not observe. There is something that I call “energy” for lack of a better term that generally follows the chakra system that when someone dedicates themselves to it they gain a “sixth sense” so to speak. Very few people have actually dedicated themselves to this. I do not mean this in a religious manner, more just in practice. This sense allows you to communicate and affect people and events across great distances. It is like ESP but not so clear a definition. Someone very high in this ability knows how you are feeling and can change your feelings and state at a great distance. My belief is we all do this without really knowing it. Kind of like the law of attraction but a bit more ooh aah mystical, because it is completely unexplainable. Since I trained with someone high up, I am constantly static shocked by everything metal I touch. I feel in touch with the world again and open and happy after he did nothing but did SOMETHING that you feel INTENSELY. Not subtly. I wish I could explain this better.
I believe quantum physics is going in the right direction.
This account has been deactivated.
As far as computers being conscious, I would have to say absolutely not. A computer relies on the operation from a person, and surely it cannot be aware of it’s surroundings unless humans are controlling its every function.
@Captainelusiv
? But what is consciousness? Maybe it has multiple dimensions, but the declaration that a tree exists in 3 (or more) dimensions does not inform one what a tree is.
@Mills
So consciousness is the capability to perceive and understand the environment both internal and external, and this capability is provided by the brain.
Sounds logical to me so far…
What about the brain grants us this capability? The heart circulates blood by pumping, muscles provide us with movement by expanding and contracting, what then does the brain do that causes the capability to perceive and understand internal and external environments (ie consciousness)?
@Mills
So if a brain can be conscious, and a computer cannot be conscious, the brain must have something that the computer does not. What is it about a brain that makes it capable of being conscious. What is a computer missing that prevents it from being conscious?
The brain translates our perceptions for us and gives them labels and sensations which is elicited from our eyes, ears, and noses. I’m pursuing metaphysics during my intermission of obligations. Very interesting, but not quite the same subject as scientific consciousness I presume.
This reply has been removed.
@Mills
Still following you so far :)
So, a brain takes sensation (input from our physical organs that receive input from the outside world) translates these into perception (internal language that provides meaning for the input) and this in turn results in behavior (output back into the environment). Sound about right to you?
A few more questions then:
1) How does the sensation become a perception in a human? (Input->Internal Language)
2) How does the perception become a behavior in a human? (Internal Language->Output)
3) If this is correct, how is a brain different from a computer?
Computer: Input(from user by use of keyboard and mouse)->Translated into Internal Language(coding language or binary)->Results in output(display on the screen).
Brain: Input(from environment by use of sensory organs)->Translated into Internal Language(perceptions or thoughts)->Results in output(behavior).
What is the missing step?
I’m sure there is a specific underlying term that distinguishes a human brain from a computer “brain” which then would explain human beings faculty of consciousness. But alas, I am not fraught with this distinct answer. I will say that our inexplicable derivation of existence is still an enigma which constitutes all of our special talents I suppose. I would just assume to accept our species sublime mental capacity and move on.
@DoubleMe
So consciousness isn’t a ‘thing’, it is instead a process. Consciousness is the process of actively converting sensory input, to internal perception, and behavioral output?
Would you say then that a computer also has the ability to process information as described above? If so, does it also have consciousness? Why or why not?
Coalesce wrote:
@Mills
Still following you so far :)
So, a brain takes sensation (input from our physical organs that receive input from the outside world) translates these into perception (internal language that provides meaning for the input) and this in turn results in behavior (output back into the environment). Sound about right to you?
A few more questions then:
1) How does the sensation become a perception in a human? (Input->Internal Language)
2) How does the perception become a behavior in a human? (Internal Language->Output)
3) If this is correct, how is a brain different from a computer?
Computer: Input(from user by use of keyboard and mouse)->Translated into Internal Language(coding language or binary)->Results in output(display on the screen).
Brain: Input(from environment by use of sensory organs)->Translated into Internal Language(perceptions or thoughts)->Results in output(behavior).
What is the missing step?
This is a fascinating discussion and I would like to continue this with you when I return from class. I hope you understand that my temporary departure is for my own prosperity. Thank you for opening my mind, and I will be sure to return:)
@Mills
Fair enough :)
I guess it’s an obsession for me. I love to ponder: ‘What am I?’ I think it’s funny that we have landed on the moon, explored the trenches of the oceans, have split the atom, have accounted for differential time-travel (GPS), and have achieved (admittedly small, short-distance, yet still astounding) quantum teleportation; when we still haven’t yet figured out what the hell we ARE! :)
I am what I am I know who i am I know what i am…Does it make sense??Personally
it doesn’t have to make sense.Same as the Computer versus Brain .Press button on computer and computer will answer only as much as you have put in to it.Totally different with Brain ,Brain can create Images ,Functions without input of any kind.Certain things like reactions Pain smell has been or is definitely programmed.
This is a really good discussion,very good…
@Barbyman
I totally agree with you on the concept that there is definitely a subjective ‘feeling’ of being ‘me’. But… if a computer prints the phrase ‘I know what I am’, does that mean it is truly self-aware? Of course not, because we assume that it is merely saying that it feels aware, when it doesn’t truly ‘feel’ that it is aware. There must be something more fundamental than *reporting* that you ‘feel’ aware. But… how do you know that the computer doesn’t actually ‘feel’ aware? How do you know that I actually *do* ‘feel’ aware? We can’t measure the ‘feeling’, we can only measure the report of the feeling, and for all of our purposes, the computer can report a feeling just as well as a human can.
Also, does a brain truly create images and functions without input? What if we could put a brain in a tank and keep it alive. What if we gave that brain no input from the outside world from the moment of its ‘growth’. Would that brain be aware? Would it have consciousness? What if we hooked it up to a body after 20 years, would it be able to report its own self-awareness prior to being hooked up to a body? (Taking into account that the brain would have to be taught language first)
I should note, I come off a bit challenging in conversation and I apologize for that. I just like to play devils advocate and see where the ideas flow from there.
Coalesce wrote:
1) How does the sensation become a perception in a human? (Input->Internal Language)
We can feel heat, but we can also perceive heat such as fire.
Coalesce wrote:
2) How does the perception become a behavior in a human? (Internal Language->Output)
Well, we’re provided with eyes, and with our ocular sense we are then capable of observing various elements and interpreting them as they have been classified. Then of course, we transmit this information to our subsequent generations.
Coalesce wrote:
3) If this is correct, how is a brain different from a computer?
I guess there isn’t much of a disparity in a computer and a human brain. However, as omniscient as computers serve, they cannot determine there own awareness, namely the fundamentals of reality or I should say sensitvity. Computers can only make decisions and determinations based on human commands. As much credit as I would love to give our operatings systems, we still need not to forget that computers were entirely created by man. For some odd reason when I envision a computer possessing its own consciousness, I naturally think about the movie “I,Robot.”
@Mills
True that, true that. As far as Input->Internal Language I was thinking more on the lines of “How do we translate the sensation of heat from our hands to the idea of heat in our brains”, what is the process by which a sensation becomes a thought, concept, idea, or image. As far as how perception becomes behavior I meant more along the lines of “How does the thought of heat cause our hands to move away from the fire?”, how do our thoughts cause behavior?
I like that you brought up the concept that computers are limited because they were created by man. Why does this make them limited? If man was created naturally (ie evolution) then why can’t a computer be fashioned to operate under the same rules as a brain? What makes a human inherently superior to a computer? The only thing I can think of is consciousness.
The problem is, if the only reason we have consciousness is because we are superior to computers, and the only reason we are superior to computers is that we have consciousness… then we are saying that consciousness is caused by consciousness!
That’s a bit of a problem, because you cannot answer a question with the question itself. It would be like saying that black-holes are black-holes because they are black-holes. Or that black-holes are caused by the existence of black-holes. Or that a black-hole is defined as that which is a black-hole.
Unfortunately, I do not know the scientific process in which a sensation becomes a thought or image. The only intuitive principle I am able to concede is that humans immediately identify each sensation and classify it accordingly. Every classification is derived from a doctrine that man eventually organized and established for reference.
What makes human beings inherently superior to computers? It has now dawned on me that without the information of man, (which is what is transfused into a pc)then a computer would have nothing to operate on. A computer depends and only operates off of the knowledge of man. A computer is just more infallible and is able to retain a vast amount of information.
After reviewing my response, it strikes me as being a little poorly worded. I was attempting to convey that computers have yet to invent or contrive unprecedented information.
But my response in general has de-railed from the track of consciousness. It is absolutely amazing how sentience seems to befuddle the human race but seemingly doesn’t frustrate the other animals binded to this exceptional awareness and sensitivity. Being aware of this superior talent, as I would deem it, has proven to be an abstruseness in the procession of life and still raises many questions as to how,why, and where. Is an animals consciousness equivalent to a human’s? Does consciousness devastate our lives? Who or what endowed us with such an ability? The question prior to my final one seems to always intrigue me.
Very good Question ,if one would keep a Brain alive!!will it still operate properly?
Yes ,now take away the Eyes ,take away its Ears,take away Arms,Legs.Now take away the operating System of an Computer or maybe not that harsh ,first the Speakers .Computer is still perfectly operating.Take away Programs .Computer is still operating as much as there is any information .Now comes the Finale…take away the Monitor.Computer is still operating,going through its Phases.How do i know its doing that ? I can hear it buzzing.Now comes the End… Turn of the Power,sill working5-4-3-2-1-000000uuuuuttttttt
@Mills
:) Seems like you and I are in the same boat.
Concerning computers and their limitations. Sounds like we have two main points, point number (1) Computers do not output anything that was not provided to them as input, and (2) They rely wholly on the input of mankind.
Regarding point (1) I might disagree to some extent. Computers can and do take their inputs and recombine them in new, invented, and unprecedented ways. Computer models have predicted principles of physics and mathematical truths that have since been proven correct in real-world applications.
It seems to me this is the same way humans do it. We don’t just go from the wheel and fire to the moon landing, instead we recombine wheels and fire to make steam powered carts, recombining steam powered carts and fuel other than wood to make modern engines, recombine modern engines and artificial wings (modelled to an extent after wings that we have seen) to make planes, and recombine combustion fuels and thrust with wings to make space flight!
Computers as well take our inputs and recombine them to make outputs that are new, they can then take the newly invented outputs to make even newer concepts. A simpler example might be a person saying a random word, and a computer displaying a random word. We both can, and we both do so according to specific rules.
So what then provides humans with their rules? That brings us to point (2) Computers rely on human rules. What rules to humans rely on? Those given to us through all of our inputs, the environment (the world around us), our social inputs (the people and culture around us), our physical program (genetics), and our social program (education). We progress through evolution, which is simply the process in which those best adapted to reproduce do so, those being less adapted reproduce at a lesser rate and eventually fade out in the face of the larger number of better adapted indivdiuals. It seems to me that computers as well take inputs from their programming and environment, and that they too reproduce depending upon whether they are most suited to reproduce (if it is functional, it continues, if one is more functional than another, it reproduces at a higher rate and eventually ‘wins out’).
@Barbyman
It is an interesting thought. Can consciousness exist without input and output? A computer with keyboard, mouse, and screen removed wouldn’t process any code as there is no input (keyboard or mouse) giving it input to process. Since it takes in no input, and does no processing since it has no input, it provides no output.
Does the human brain similarly only process (think) when provided input (sensation). And does it exhibit activity/behavior/evidence of consciousness (output) without any input? What would a human brain think if it had never ever been exposed to language, images, sounds, touch sensations, tastes, or scents? Could it picture anything? It has never seen anything to picture, nor does it have anything to recombine in the the image of something new. Could it think in language to itself? It has never heard nor learned language. Could it imagine a sound, or touch, or scent? It has never experienced any and as such cannot invent any based upon recombinations since no prior sensations exist.
If one could speak to the Neanderthals around 30 000 years ago most probably they were talking and communicating with not eve 5% of Words what we are speaking today.Go back to Iraq 7000 years ago There highest Number was 1 ” ONE ” Go back To there Family Tree and you will see that the son of the grate , grate Grand Father Abdullah was only mentioned they never had a word for your next of Kin.Even the Romans just had a few numbers .The best counting Tool there is and will be is the Abacus .The best Scale is just a stick with two Shells hanging in balance .there one can count everything what men has ever wanted and taken from this Planet.I call this all combined “Evolution”mind and Body and Environment.Look at
any girls or Boys of today The Girls at 12 years old look like the girls at 20 when i was a Teenager The boys the same.To much Grows Hormones in our Food . Well i wont be seeing the result anymore ,but the next 50 years …………..
@Barbyman
True true, the world marches on in what seems to be an accelerating pace. I just wonder how quickly we are able to adapt to our own discoveries. What happens when we reach the point that we are innovating things faster than we can properly understand them? I would assume things would limit themselves at that point, as we couldn’t use the new innovations in recombinations to create newer innovations until we took the time to fully comprehend our current progress.
In any event… we are looking at a whirlwind of progress and advancement, and have still as of yet not figured out what the hell *we* are! :)
I also believe that we all run in “loops”. Loops are something from hypnosis/NLP that work like this… you have an emotion and a thought at the same time. The emotion decides the thought, or the thought decides the emotion. Emotions are quicker than thoughts and that is why most people think emotionally. Loops happen when an emotion “loops” through you, you feel where it begins and where it ends, and once it connects it gets stronger and continues until it ends. If you can “end” the loop before it makes its first pass, you effectively mitigate the emotion before it starts, thus using logic. This actually takes practice and affects everyone from addicts to people with anger management issues. Really it’s all the same system. Each emotional loop can be mapped to a specific brain wave pattern… we just don’t have all of the necessary technology. I believe consciousness is a “loop” that exists in all things living that make decisions.
This account has been deactivated.
I once got hold of a little booklet,I guess one still find it in Libraries in Australia called Phone numbers to Heaven were the writer mentioned a twin Earth. Twin of everything in reverse.he only shows a few numbers and if one look closely
one will find all sorts of things ,like days month Years events…….
06196103 06187103
30169160 30178160
36365263 36365263
I have been to an Airshow with Planes from the Smallest to the largest .We walked through an Russian transport Plane with a capassity of 2000 full equipped soldiers .now If columbus would have been Cryonised or frozen and we would be able to wake him up ,he would finnish in a Mental Instituition.Impossible for him to Comprehend .When Roentgen invented the Xray Maschiene People went crazy
If Columbus could have been cryogenically frozen and reanimated in the modern era, he would be put on trial for crimes against humanity.
People went batso over the Atomic bomb tests back in the day. These days they are flipping over theoretical planetside micro-wormholes as a result of the Large Hadron Collider. We have two options, keep studying, learning, and growing… or stop. I say keep going!
Granted, eventually it is possible we will run across something that will annihilate us all when we test it, but that just helps support my opinion that we should be colonizing outside of our solar system ASAP!
just look at these numbers maybe you can work it out, so far i can only see days in the year.But they reckon there is alot more to it…
If we operate on the same principles as computers do, that would indicate that experience and resulting behavior are entirely based upon an organisms exposure to prior stimuli. If this is the case… there is no overarching purpose or goal in life. We are defined by the context in which we exist, and are inseperable from it. Our choices are defined by our history of events, and even the glimmer of choice or attitude is squashed as it only represents what we could not otherwise be. Even now, these questions I bear and these sentiments I voice… are nothing but swirls in a stream, where I am less than even a twig borne on its currents… I am nothing more than an event, a minute whorl for a moment in time, a snapshot of an endless and mechanistic function.
Or
If we have some inherent property that truly sets us apart from the natural world… what is that property? How did we obtain it? Will others attain it? Is there supposed to be some purpose associated with it or do we simply have to make of it what we will?
Ultimately, whether we are conscious or not… the answer seems somewhat depressing…
Meh, it’s Friday. Who’s up for a shot of Jack?
Humans ARE computers, just made of different stuff. In the future we will have the ability to make computers more intelligent than anything.
This account has been deactivated.
Is the human mind special or just different? Is it merely quantitatively different, or is it also qualitatively different?
If our advanced abilities stem from nothing more than a further development of structures that exist in other primates, then we should be able to accelerate the development of these structures in primate brains, or simulate these structures in artificial organic structures or digital structures, thus creating intelligence.
If these abilities stem from something beyond our physical structures, what is it then that we have that others do not that lends us these abilities?
Anonymous
#
2 weeks, 5 days ago (6 months, 1 week after post)
Consciousness is not the same thing as self awareness. That’s like consciousness plus.
What’s the difference between consciousness and self-awareness? Is a dog or a cat conscious but not self-aware? If we define consciousness as awareness of environment, and take into account that the self is the primary environment that any of us experience… any organism that is aware is conscious and is therefore self-aware.
I think the main distinction between lower order consciousness and higher order consciousness is simply a function of the complexity of the stimulus-response mechanism. Thus, chemical compounds exhibit simple and predictable responses to their environments (stimuli), and humans exhibit complex and largely unpredictable responses to our environments (stimuli). Both chemical compounds and humans can be seen to be self-reactive and thus self-aware. Perhaps it is communication on the lower spectrum, symbol manipulation in the middle, and fully formed language on the upper end that define what we think of as consciousness.
Any thoughts?
If you can define consciousness then you can define what is intelligent life. But you can’t define it because we can not comprehend it’s absence.
Sure we can, imagine a plague taking out all of humanity, might as well take out all mammals just to be sure. World sans intelligent life. Much as it is now, just with less complexity.
Anonymous
#
4 days, 10 hours ago (6 months, 3 weeks after post)
sans intelligent life means sans US! weird. we can’t imagine it because we have no concept of what non-existant US’S are. lol. kind of like space? it’s so big, we cannot fathom it’s reaches. heaven. we have no idea, just what’s written and imagined from those before us. hell? same thing. these are things beyond our comprehension because we have no way of experiencing their existance. for now, it seems all is theoretical.
Don’t fool yourself, this is heaven. At least try to make it so for yourself and others.
True true, we are ‘thinking machines’ and our conclusions are only as good as the wiring and program. Would be terribly sad to find that we are a bunch of broken calculators in which 1+1=3. But then again, if that was our program, it would be reality and we would never find otherwise :)
Good ole boy
captainelusiv
mortgages.realestat