Why Great Minds Can't Grasp Consciousness

LiveScience.com ^ | 8-8-05 | Ker Than

[beavus]

Hence, though we see the universe through the lens of reason, the lens (Reason) cannot look at itself and define itself.

Not really. It only means that you can't use the concept of reason as an explanation of reason. You can potentially use reason to understand reason. USING reason as a tool isn't the same as referring to it in an explanation. You can use a hammer to make a hammer.

[beavus]

Because all of existence is absolutely meaningless without consciousness in it.

Yes, meaning is a function of consciousness. However, the crab nebula would still be around even if consciousness weren't. However, there would be nobody to care.

[HangnJudge]

You can use a hammer to make a hammer.

But you can't use a hammer to explain a hammer, to understand it, or to define it

[beavus]

But you can't use a hammer to explain a hammer, to understand it, or to define it

You can't use an actual hammer to explain anything, because that isn't what hammer do. Hammers pound things. Reason explains things.

You can however use an actual hammer to understand hammers (look at it, pound with it, generally interact with it), and you can use an actual hammer to define hammers (which ultimately, with some abstraction across many different observations of hammers, is what we do).

You cannot, however, use the notion hammer as an explanation of what a hammer is. Instead, you'd have to introspect, peruse your memories, and find out what observations or non-hammer concepts you used to form the concept of hammer.

[HangnJudge]

You cannot, however, use the notion hammer as an explanation of what a hammer is. Instead, you'd have to introspect, peruse your memories, and find out what observations or non-hammer concepts you used to form the concept of hammer.

Ah, but now you are using reason to study the hammer, not the hammer itself
We still have the problem of using Reason to explain Reason,
Logic to understand Logic

[beavus]

Ah, but now you are using reason to study the hammer, not the hammer itself

Of course. Understanding is the function of reason, not of hammers.

We still have the problem of using Reason to explain Reason, Logic to understand Logic

But we never had that problem. Reason is the tool for understanding everying, including reason.

TOOL.........FUNCTION........EXAMPLE OBJECTS OF FUNCTION
hammer......pounding.............nails, rocks, hammers
reason........understanding......nails, hammers, reason

[Ferris]

However, the crab nebula would still be around even if consciousness weren't. However, there would be nobody to care.

Totally correct...

The crab nebula would still be there, but it would be totally worthless and meaningless without consciousness there to observe it, and give it meaning...

And that's why consciousness is an integral part..

Because without that, you have..... nothing...

[GOPJ]

The point of "quickening"?

Wouldn't that be interesting. Like being startled from a sleep, eh?

yes, the difference between the quick and the dead.

[HangnJudge]

Still the same problem
a process cannot explain itself, any more than a thing can explain itself

Your explanation implicitly assumes that the process of Reasoning is True
Because Reason is reasonable, then Reason is Valid
The very concept of validity assumes appeals to Reason
This conversation itself falls apart without the assumptions of Reason and Logic

I've had too much fun tonight, must sign off

[beavus]

Because without that, you have..... nothing...

Nothing? What about the crab nebula?

[Ferris]

Nothing? What about the crab nebula?

It takes consciousness to even recognize that such a thing is out there...

Much less name it...

Consider this...

If a galaxy exists in the universe...

And there is no consciousness to see it, comprehend it, and give it meaning...

Does it have any value at all?

[Fitzcarraldo]

We can posit a super-consciousness beyond ours, which is maybe link to ours in some way.

[beavus]

Still the same problem a process cannot explain itself, any more than a thing can explain itself

Again, I don't see the problem. I don't see how what you say is true.

Your explanation implicitly assumes that the process of Reasoning is True

All explanations, including those attempting to discount reason, use reason. Ironic. And fallacious.

Because Reason is reasonable, then Reason is Valid The very concept of validity assumes appeals to Reason This conversation itself falls apart without the assumptions of Reason and Logic

This is akin to saying "this conversation itself falls apart without this conversation".

Either we are reasoning, or we are not. It is a recognition of the existence of the process. It is true, because to assume otherwise leads to a contradiction, i.e. an impossibility.

[beavus]

If a galaxy exists in the universe... And there is no consciousness to see it, comprehend it, and give it meaning... Does it have any value at all?

Of course not. Valuing is a function of consciousness.

But you made contradictory statements before. You said the crab nebula would still be there AND there would be nothing. But the crab nebula clearly is something, which is not nothing. So you said there would be nothing and not nothing.

[Ferris]

Of course not. Valuing is a function of consciousness.

Exactly.. Therefore, if no consciousness, then no value... No meaning..

But you made contradictory statements before. You said the crab nebula would still be there AND there would be nothing. But the crab nebula clearly is something, which is not nothing. So you said there would be nothing and not nothing.

No, I was speaking figuratively..

"Nothing" as in, of no value, or no meaning... Not as in, non existent..

It's still there, it's just meaningless and valueless..

[elbucko]

By this reckoning, consciousness as an attribute of the human nervous system is likely an emergent property which cannot be explained except at a level of complexity higher still--whatever that might be.

In other words, we can't know. Only a higher power than man has the necessary capacity to understand human consciousness. Perhaps it's just as well, but it should not deter the search, we might find something useful.

[Ferris]

We can posit a super-consciousness beyond ours, which is maybe link to ours in some way.

ALL consciousness is the same..

In all times.. In all places...

The only thing that separates us from a consciousness 1 million years more advanced, is the level of knowledge..

The ability to comprehend and understand is exactly the same...

And you know they would already have anti-gravity stuff too!

[ARridgerunner]

Simple is nice.

Ping it out, Please.

I, for one, would like to hear simple.

[beavus]

Sounds like we are in total agreement. That is a very unusual experience for me.

[little jeremiah]

Okay, I'll ping it out tomorrow when my brain gets recharged! I was going to but because my comments page only shows 20, stuff gets lost real easily.

This topic is right up my alley, so to speak! Thanks for reminding me.