#hard problem

[thegirlwithaclockheart]

Me when I’m reading a fanfic and it’s actually good:

[protoslacker]

The fundamental absence of a logical bridge to connect quantities to qualities, caused by the abandonment of the semantic reference that underpinned the meaning of the quantities to begin with, is the hard problem. The premises of mainstream Physicalism are such that, in order for quantities to have meaning, qualities need to preexist them. But when Physicalism then tries to account for the qualities in terms of the quantities, the latter must preexist the former and thus become literally meaningless. Nothing can be deduced in principle from meaningless things, and that’s the hard problem right there.

Bernardo Kastrup. The true, hidden origin of the so-called 'Hard Problem of Consciousness'

Analytic Idealism in a Nutshell

[s33]

Who, What, and Which

We are a '𝐰𝐡𝐨'. The brain is a 'what'.

Neither are created completely by the other, but both act dynamically and continuously to influence and define that creation. A 'what' is just a name that some 'who' gives to all that is sufficiently unlike themselves.

The creation is, I propose, accomplished on a deeper level by a preponderance of "𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡" 'graphings (entropy, negentropy, space, time) that constrain an aesthetic Holos...the absolute totality.

This is like a neutral monism model, but it is not exactly neutral becuase the Holos, the 'thesis' is more mind-like than it is like the antithesis - matter. It is not exactly a monism because there is no static boundedness that makes 'it' 'one' or 'many'. Those distinctions should not be meaningful at the absolute level, because the thesis is the only phenomenon of existence. The Holos is the unbounded source of infinite novelty, not as mechanistic formation or information, but as aesthetic-participatory experience.

[sciencesideanswers]

Would it be possible to convert someone's mind into an A.I. or be stored on a computer?

We don’t know quite for sure yet.

The thing is: right now we can’t. We just don’t have the power!

But eventually, computation will get so efficient that we’ll be able to store all the connections of the brain, all the configuration, all the particular ways in which a particular person is setup.

If we did that, as taking a very very detailed photograph of their brain, and we switched it on... would it gain consciousness? Would it be the same person? (As in, feel like them, have the same memories, etc.)

We don’t know for sure: this is the hard problem of consciousness. Is a physical configuration all it takes for something to be aware of itself? Can we just imbue self-awareness on something like that? Does consciousness appear naturally on things that are complex enough?

I’ve been reading a bit on the Integrated Information Theory of consciousness (there are a few good lectures on it). It claims that given the right complexity and  configuration, anything can become conscious, but different measurements of consciousness exist, and they would be measurable. Interesting stuff.

Back to your question: let’s assume for a moment that we could copy someone’s mind and put it in a computer. Would it be AI? Would it be “artificial” or not? Something to ponder on...

[s33]

by Raymond Tallis, M.D. It is [Bishop] Berkeley’s merit to have realised that the Cartesian/Newtonian philosophers, seeking to a...

“It is [Bishop] Berkeley’s merit to have realised that the Cartesian/Newtonian philosophers, seeking to account for a seeable world, succeeded only in substituting a world that could in no sense be seen. He realised that they had substituted a theory of optics for a theory of visual perception.        --L Susan Stebbing” 3.6          Why There Can Never Be a Brain Science of Consciousness: The Disappearance of Appearance...

[eclecticoccult]

so I learned about panpsychism yesterday. and im still trying to make sure i understand. from what ive heard, its the postulation that its consciousness all the way down, and that "the mind" is a fundamental aspect of reality, that sentience is ubiquitous, but somehow consciousness is still restricted from "inanimate objects" like rocks or buildings but i don't understand how those two things can coexist. if electrons have an experience of reality, as in, it "feels like something," to be an electron, why would this be limited to only biological organisms?

[allengreenfield]

New Images Show Life’s Glow Goes Dark at Death

New images show an invisible ‘biophoton’ glow in living tissue that falls after death—measurable light captured with ultra-sensitive cameras

[allengreenfield]

Scientists Have Discovered the Brain’s "Awareness Switch"

Neuroscientists have wondered how our brain decides what we notice—and what we ignore—in the constant stream of sights, sounds, and thoughts