Are spirits stupid?

[_Tarski]

Tarski wrote:
OK, what aspect of consciousness do think can't be? Self monitoring, color awareness? Be specific.

I guess I don't follow what you are asking for. You said that you are conscious and indicated that you understand how consciousness is accomplished by a physical being. For me, consciousness is awareness of the world around me and my place in that world, my state of being (hopes, desires, emotions, feelings), thoughts that I am having, among others. If you have similar conscious experiences, how are these accomplished by a physical being?

Ummm. I don't follow you. All of those things are accomplished by instruments of a awareness: Eyes, visual cotex, nose, sense of touch, self modelling units, spatial orientation systems etc.
A better question is how could I be aware of the word around me without physical stuff like eyes, ears, visual cortex, hands, and neural strcutres that process the information and that are be used to navigate the world?

[_SeekerofTruth]

Tarski wrote:
Ummm. I don't follow you. All of those things are accomplished by instruments of a awareness: Eyes, visual cotex, nose, sense of touch, self modelling units, spatial orientation systems etc.
A better question is how could I be aware of the word around me without physical stuff like eyes, ears, visual cortex, hands, and neural strcutres that process the information and that are be used to navigate the world?

How are the things I mentioned accomplished by these instruments of awareness? What makes you think these things even exist? What makes you think that you exist? We always seem to come back to Descartes: "Cogito ergo sum." You think you exist. You think these things you listed exist. You think these things you listed are producing consciousness. But all you really have is consciousness itself and the thoughts associated with consciousness. At least that is the way it is with me. How can you be so certain that the source of consciousness is the very thing that consciousness may be producing? If these things you mention somehow exist outside of consciousness how would you know?

[_Some Schmo]

Tarski wrote:
Ummm. I don't follow you. All of those things are accomplished by instruments of a awareness: Eyes, visual cotex, nose, sense of touch, self modelling units, spatial orientation systems etc.
A better question is how could I be aware of the word around me without physical stuff like eyes, ears, visual cortex, hands, and neural strcutres that process the information and that are be used to navigate the world?

How are the things I mentioned accomplished by these instruments of awareness? What makes you think these things even exist? What makes you think that you exist? We always seem to come back to Descartes: "Cogito ergo sum." You think you exist. You think these things you listed exist. You think these things you listed are producing consciousness. But all you really have is consciousness itself and the thoughts associated with consciousness. At least that is the way it is with me. How can you be so certain that the source of consciousness is the very thing that consciousness may be producing? If these things you mention somehow exist outside of consciousness how would you know?

This is just so silly.

Here's an experiment for you. See if you can remain conscious when your body goes to sleep. See how that works out for ya.

*rolls eyes*

[_SeekerofTruth]

This is just so silly.

Here's an experiment for you. See if you can remain conscious when your body goes to sleep. See how that works out for ya.

*rolls eyes*

Have you ever heard of lucid dreaming?

http://www.lucidity.com/Tucson2.abs.html

There are individuals who can purposefully alter brain activity. Some can produce delta waves, a sign of deep sleep while not actually being asleep. Others can even produce a flat EEG, or nearly so. Ken Wilber is one such person.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFFMtq5g8N4&feature=related

You are avoiding the issue. Materialists have tried repeatedly to dismiss Descartes and the astute observation that he made. To say that it is silly is not an intelligent answer. There are individuals much more intelligent than either of us who have struggled, and continue to struggle, with the problem raised by Descartes. The philosopher John Searle is an example.

Since you feel it is beneath you to deal with this problem, at the very least, describe how a physical being produces consciousness as you claimed.

[_Some Schmo]

Is lucid dreaming (or any kind of dreaming) the same as consciousness?

Why do drugs and alcohol alter the nature of our consciousness? Is that our "spirit" getting high? Of course not; it's a change in the chemical makeup of our physiology. Clearly, the mechanisms we use to think and perceive are the product of our bodies. Why this need to overcomplicate matters?

How the actual material that makes up our brains produces consciousness is not known to me, but that's not relevant. We can tell it's our brains because consciousness goes away when our brains are altered or turned off. Or how about a baby? Their brains are incredibly underdeveloped, and they have practically no awareness at all, until they reach about two or three and can actually start to remember things. Where was your consciousness before you were born and developed to that stage? One would think if it were a separate entity, people would have a memory of waiting around for a body to inhabit.

If you think calling consciousness a separate, non-physical entity silly is not an intelligent answer, that's nothing compared to trying to postulate that your consciousness comes from something other than the matter that makes up your physiology... like thin air.

I'm a computer programmer. I've created several video games (among other programs), and I never cease to be amazed at how my own creations appear to take on a life of their own. But just because something seems like it has its own "essence" or "spirit" doesn't make it so. I assure you; my games operate with electricity, hardware and instructions, and that's it... just like your brain does.

As for intelligent people giving this any kind of consideration at all, well, we know smart people believe stupid things. That's what religion is all about.

[_Tarski]

Tarski wrote:
Ummm. I don't follow you. All of those things are accomplished by instruments of a awareness: Eyes, visual cotex, nose, sense of touch, self modelling units, spatial orientation systems etc.
A better question is how could I be aware of the word around me without physical stuff like eyes, ears, visual cortex, hands, and neural strcutres that process the information and that are be used to navigate the world?

How are the things I mentioned accomplished by these instruments of awareness? What makes you think these things even exist? What makes you think that you exist? We always seem to come back to Descartes: "Cogito ergo sum." You think you exist. You think these things you listed exist. You think these things you listed are producing consciousness. But all you really have is consciousness itself and the thoughts associated with consciousness. At least that is the way it is with me. How can you be so certain that the source of consciousness is the very thing that consciousness may be producing? If these things you mention somehow exist outside of consciousness how would you know?

Huh?
If you have to resort to asking how I know I exist to make your (non) point then I guess I have made mine. Shheesh.

Consiousness is a set of abilities to negotiate, sense, think about and make judgments about what is happening in my environment and in my own body. These faculties comprise consciousness. They are abilities that take some seriously complex machinery (not magic). You are hung up on an intutition- most likely centered around things like the redness of red and the unexplainable way salt tastes and so on. This kind of thinking is a confused dead end.

[_Tarski]

*chirp..... chirp...... chirp*

[_SeekerofTruth]

Tarski said:
Consiousness is a set of abilities to negotiate, sense, think about and make judgments about what is happening in my environment and in my own body. These faculties comprise consciousness. They are abilities that take some seriously complex machinery (not magic). You are hung up on an intutition- most likely centered around things like the redness of red and the unexplainable way salt tastes and so on. This kind of thinking is a confused dead end.

I do not understand how "set of abilities" explains consciousness. Furthermore, it is only a supposition that the brain (I assume this is the "seriously complex machinery" you are referring to) produces these abilities, should they even exist. I suppose the brain, if it exists, can produce the words "consciousness is a set of abilities..." but merely stating these words in some form does not, in my opinion, explain conscious awareness. In other words, I do not think that it can be shown that cognition and brain function are identical. You have conscious awareness and conscious thoughts (I assume). That is all you really know for certain (I would challenge you to show otherwise). Is your brain, which is a product of these thoughts, producing these thoughts? If so, how? (if you had no conscious awareness and conscious thoughts would your brain even exist for you? Isn't it your conscious awareness that allows you to think your brain exists?)

I realize language cannot adequately describe what we are thinking or the world we have created through thought, but this does not negate the experience. We attempt to explain this experience. For some, such as yourself, it is explained in terms of brain function. In some way the brain (a construct of thought) magically produces conscious awareness and conscious thought. For others, conscious thought exists in and of itself. It is not dependent upon nor is it created by anything material. Each attempt to explain conscious thought is ultimately based on faith and belief. You have faith (a belief) that science (again a complex of thoughts) will eventually explain conscious thought. My belief is that this will never happen, for the reasons I have stated.

[_dartagnan]

As I said in celestial, I'll be back in town in a couple of weeks. I've been spending time with the fam here in Brasil for the past couple of weeks, so I know I have some catching up to do.

This is a thread that interests me, but before I get back I think it would be helpful for those interested to take a look at the views by other philosophers who disagree with Dennett. Chalmers is the most vocal but Nagle is perhaps the most respected.

It should be of no surprise that those who are involved with any sort of anti-religion activity (message boards) are those who prefer to side with Dennett. As a computer man myself, I find the analogy by Dennett inadequate. So humans are merely computers and nothing more? Are computers aware of their own existence? Computers are programmed by an intelligent source, so does that mean humans, as computers, were also programmed by a (divine?) intelligence?

These are some questions I'd like to discuss when I return. In the meantime, be sure to check out this website, which gives a decent rundown on the various positions. Suffice it to say, Dennett's book is highly controversial and is not without its critics. And no, his critics are not just theologians, they are scholars whose credentials match or surpass his own.

http://www.consciousentities.com/

[_Tarski]

Tarski said:
Consiousness is a set of abilities to negotiate, sense, think about and make judgments about what is happening in my environment and in my own body. These faculties comprise consciousness. They are abilities that take some seriously complex machinery (not magic). You are hung up on an intutition- most likely centered around things like the redness of red and the unexplainable way salt tastes and so on. This kind of thinking is a confused dead end.

I do not understand how "set of abilities" explains consciousness.

Its what consciousness is (a set of abilities). Now the goal is to explain those abilities.
How are we going to make progress here. Tell me exactly what you think consciousness is so that I know what you expect me to explain. Be clear and try not to just replace undefined terms with other undefined terms.

Furthermore, it is only a supposition that the brain (I assume this is the "seriously complex machinery" you are referring to) produces these abilities, should they even exist.

Is it only a supposition that eyes have anything to do with seeing or that ears having anything to do with hearing. Does seeing have anything to do with being aware conscious of the world?
How about real time brain activity imagine that shows which parts of the brain are active during various kinds of thinking and awareness? Coincidence?