I can’t really define consciousness; doing so would be akin to trying to define red. The best I can do is point to something that is conscious (such as myself) and say “conscious” and then point to something that seems unlikely to be conscious (such as a rock) and say “not conscious.”
The best I can do is point to something that is conscious (such as myself) and say “conscious” and then point to something that seems unlikely to be conscious (such as a rock) and say “not conscious.”
That’s not enough to be able to meaningfully answer the question “If one’s consciousness suddenly became a totally different one, we know of no quantum particles that would change”.
Practically I can distinguish a state where my heartbeat is within my conscious awareness from the state where it isn’t. I can also distinguish the state where the heartbeat of another person is within my awareness and isn’t.
I can distinguish between having the person sitting next to me in a lecture within my awareness and not having them within my awareness.
In both cases there are practical consequences. Likely consequences that you haven’t observed because you don’t have control over the different states and therefore can’t experiment with it.
Again, I can’t really describe consciousness, so I’ll give a example. Computers are aware of the user’s keystrokes, as in there is some signal in the computer that is formed by keystrokes and processed accordingly, but the computer isn’t necessarily conscious.
My body is always aware of it’s heart beat the same way that a computer is always aware of the users keystrokes.
That’s not the awareness I’m talking about. I’m talking about conscious awareness where it’s possible to be aware of the heart beat and possible not to be.
I’m sorry if I was not clear enough. I was meaning to state how you yourself understand the term “consciousness”. For example, sound can be defined as a compression wave, or as a sensory experience.
If you define consciousness as in your example, then consciousness should always persist while you are considered to be different from a non-living object. However, it is possible to come up with a definition of consciousness where being asleep would make consciousness non-persistent.
Red is the color of surfaces emitting/transmitting/scattering plenty of low-energy visible light but little high-energy visible light. Doesn’t sound too tricky to me. What am I missing?
Again, I think we’re this is more vocabulary confusion. When you said red, I think you meant the causes of one experiencing what we call “seeing red”. When I said red, I meant one’s subjective experience of red, as opposed to the subjective experience of blue. If one was changed so that when the photons of the wavelength that’s normally seen as red were instead seen as what’s normally seen as blue, there would be a difference is what is subjectively experienced, even though one can’t rigorously define it.
I can’t really define consciousness; doing so would be akin to trying to define red. The best I can do is point to something that is conscious (such as myself) and say “conscious” and then point to something that seems unlikely to be conscious (such as a rock) and say “not conscious.”
That’s not enough to be able to meaningfully answer the question “If one’s consciousness suddenly became a totally different one, we know of no quantum particles that would change”.
Practically I can distinguish a state where my heartbeat is within my conscious awareness from the state where it isn’t. I can also distinguish the state where the heartbeat of another person is within my awareness and isn’t.
I can distinguish between having the person sitting next to me in a lecture within my awareness and not having them within my awareness.
In both cases there are practical consequences. Likely consequences that you haven’t observed because you don’t have control over the different states and therefore can’t experiment with it.
I don’t follow. Why are you talking about conscious awareness?
What do you think consciousness is about when it’s not about being aware and perceiving something?
Again, I can’t really describe consciousness, so I’ll give a example. Computers are aware of the user’s keystrokes, as in there is some signal in the computer that is formed by keystrokes and processed accordingly, but the computer isn’t necessarily conscious.
My body is always aware of it’s heart beat the same way that a computer is always aware of the users keystrokes.
That’s not the awareness I’m talking about. I’m talking about conscious awareness where it’s possible to be aware of the heart beat and possible not to be.
Yes, I think I’m thinking about the same type of consciousness/awareness you are. Where were we going with this?
Then why are you speaking about the way a computer is aware about all keystrokes that the keyboard sends? That’s not what I’m talking about.
The keystroke example was to demonstrate what I didn’t mean when I said consciousness.
Okay, sorry on that part.
I’m sorry if I was not clear enough. I was meaning to state how you yourself understand the term “consciousness”. For example, sound can be defined as a compression wave, or as a sensory experience.
If you define consciousness as in your example, then consciousness should always persist while you are considered to be different from a non-living object. However, it is possible to come up with a definition of consciousness where being asleep would make consciousness non-persistent.
I didn’t realize there were multiple definitions of consciousness. Where can I learn what they are?
Red is the color of surfaces emitting/transmitting/scattering plenty of low-energy visible light but little high-energy visible light. Doesn’t sound too tricky to me. What am I missing?
Again, I think we’re this is more vocabulary confusion. When you said red, I think you meant the causes of one experiencing what we call “seeing red”. When I said red, I meant one’s subjective experience of red, as opposed to the subjective experience of blue. If one was changed so that when the photons of the wavelength that’s normally seen as red were instead seen as what’s normally seen as blue, there would be a difference is what is subjectively experienced, even though one can’t rigorously define it.
Consider asking a less trivial question, like “Can a machine be conscious?”
And consider reading http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=1951 and http://edge.org/responses/what-do-you-think-about-machines-that-think
As for a better attempt to dissolve a related question, see http://lesswrong.com/lw/5n9/seeing_red_dissolving_marys_room_and_qualia/