What makes discussions with people who are convinced that there can be no rational explanation for consciousness so difficult is that they mostly won’t be prepared to argue the question via rational explanations
-
-
I see this idea as akin to the simulation hypothesis: fun, interesting, very implausible, but ultimately impossible to disprove.
-
William James and Aldous Huxley both proposed the reducing valve / antennae framework of consciousness not because it sounded fun & interesting, though it did, but because it better opened an explanatory path for the phenomenology of altered states of consciousness...
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
"generated by the brain", when the brain itself is generated by reality, is just one step of abstraction away from panpsychism - which is the idea I'm more inclined towards
-
What is "reality" in this sense? Is it what we experience as humans or the objective "reality" that we can't individually experience? If it's the subjective "reality", why not call that consciousness? Subjective reality = consciousness, no?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I see the antenna as analogy for the senses, external input of which a meaningful component is interaction with other humans. Would a brain raised in total sensory deprivation be conscious? Do we have a definition consciousness with which that question can be answered?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.