On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote
>> Forget about solving it, I would much rather read a discourse that >> clearly and unambiguously explains exactly what "the hard problem" is. >> > > > In a nutshell, the difficulty is that a complete 3p explanation of the > brain seems to make consciousness into something having no role and no > reason, and this contradicts the first person experience we have. > That's not true, the external objective environment (the weather, a syringe full of drugs, a punch to the face) can cause a big subjective change. And a subjective experience like a itch can cause a external objective effect, like moving the matter in your hand to scratch the matter in your nose. >> I think consciousness is probably just the way information feels when it >> is being processed; >> > > > In which computations. You admit yourself that consciousness cannot be > localized in one brain, > Yes, because computations can't be localized either. >> if you don't find that explanation satisfactory it can only mean one >> thing, you don't believe that consciousness is fundamental. >> > > > Good point. Consciousness can't be fundamental, especially in theories > trying to explain it. > So if you say X causes consciousness you must either explain what causes X or say that X is fundamental. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
