Ok, given your intent, "trying to see how we could explore the degree of our agreement on the proposition that we are all self-conscious."
In our endeavors so far, most of us have been guilty of anthropomorphism in our attribution of consciousness to other species - we see behavior and *_interpret_* it as 'humanly/humanish' and therefore conclude consciousness-self-experienced-observed must also exist in those other entities. Self-consciousness is an axiom in this situation not a conclusion. If this is so, is it not the case that we all agree on the proposition: "we are all self-conscious?" The real problem, one that I cannot see resolved without retreat to metaphysics, is whether or not "consciousness" is a property of a thing called "self;" or is consciousSelf a monad? Tons of fun, for some, speculation ensues. I am logic-challenged and probably wrong. davew On Thu, Jul 18, 2024, at 11:33 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > Thanks, Dave. Sorry if I don]t hold up my end. I am falling behind in > everything except my capacity to be stirred up by ideas. Bad combination. > Maybe it's time for Caleb to come and take away my keyboard. > > So, I now see a new problem in our anecdotal method here: How to continue > without spinning off into vague agreement. Along with a desire to achieve > agreement comes a desire to delimit it. We agree that all the characters in > the story are conscious; I am trying to see how we could explore the degree > of our agreement on the proposition that we are all self-conscious. > > That's what I am thinking about now, but I am late to THUAM so I am going > there now. > > N > > > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 4:41 PM Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm> wrote: >> __ >>> Dusty is conscious of Dusty. One reason: I give Jackson (my other dog) a >>> treat and observe body language and facial expressions exhibited by Dusty >>> that I interpret as, "where's mine?" This indicates to me some kind of >>> Dusty self-awareness/consciousness of self. >> >> **Could you say more about the body language and facial expressions. >> Imagine that I am going to take care of your two dogs for a weekend; what >> would you tell me to look for?** >> >> the above is the quote from me email to the list the bold-italic is your >> request. around the 15th of July. >> >> >> >> >> Dusty and Jackson have their own idiosyncratic (notice the attribution of a >> self-aware consciousness in that word) way of asking for / obtaining what >> they want. >> >> Dusty's way is silent, Jackson's almost always involves a gentle-bark/yip. >> E.g., Dusty wants a head rub so she comes over and places her chin on my >> knee and looks soulful. Jackson sits close to my knee, establishes eye >> contact and vocalizes his request. >> >> Both come to my bed at the earliest sign of sunrise (around 5:30 these days) >> and stare at me. Jackson will eventually vocalize and I get up. Dusty has >> observed this, daily, for the past N-months but has never been tempted to >> vocalize herself. >> >> if she ever does vocalize, even by accident, I will immediately rise and see >> if she learns the stimulus-response pattern. >> >> I may be seeing nothing more than early training. Dusty's previous owners >> demanded that she be seen and not heard, and to wait, indefinitely, for >> explicit invitations. I have no idea about Jackson's early training. >> >> davew >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024, at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: >>> David, and all. >>> >>> I am trying to keep this thread as clean of the meta as I can. So I will >>> answer your general critique on the other thread. Suffice it to say here >>> that behaviorism is way in the rear view mirror at this point and I >>> certainly am not trying to teach it. Suffice it to say, also, I am sure I >>> have done all the bad things you point to; I am blundering about here >>> trying to find a way toward shared understandings of experiences. >>> >>> **Dusty will look up, at Jackson, as he is receiving a treat, then stand, >>> in a position I interpret as 'being on alert' and look at Jackson, then at >>> me, then Jackson, then me (sometimes as many as 4-5 times), then 'staring' >>> at me. Jackson does something similar, but he will also utter a small >>> bark/yip while staring.** >>> >>> My command of gmail bring what it is, I cannot find the email where I >>> prompted this elaboration from you. I am sure there is one. i just cant >>> find it. Ok, so lets say we are groping toward a method here, call it >>> critical anecdotalism. Person A tells a story which, intuitively he feels >>> is an example of some experience-type. Person B agrees or disagrees with >>> that attribution. Together we work out what other experiences would follow >>> if this attribution was correct. Here, we might discover that we disagree >>> about the boundaries of the experience-type. But it if we find that we >>> agree on those boundaries, then we search through our experiences for other >>> anecdotes that fall within -- or out of --the type. So, as I read your >>> description, I think, this is an example of "trying to figure out what the >>> heck I have to do to get a treat, around here?" You might then do an >>> experiment, which I understand in this context to be a procedure that >>> provokes an experience that we both would take as decisive. Let's say you >>> start to feed Jackson ONLY when he yips. If, after a few days of that, >>> Dusty doesn't begin to yip, I would be less inclined to my original >>> attribution. >>> >>> It's kind of you to help me with this, Dave. >>> >>> It's quite possible I am just sliding into dementia. Always a risk. >>> >>> Nick >>> >>> >>> davew >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:27 AM Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm> >>> wrote: >>>> From the beginning, I believed this thread was, in substantial part, >>>> Nick's attempt to 'teach' us to think as behavioralists and see how far we >>>> could go in achieving some kind of consensus. I tried very hard to couch >>>> all of my responses in such terms. I did express, early on, that I had >>>> serious doubts about how far we could go without deviating into other >>>> questions—and the answer appears to be not far. >>>> >>>> First I copped to blatant anthropomorphism with seem to be accepted with >>>> no concern. >>>> Then Nick introduced metaphysics followed by a quick mea culpa. >>>> Then a flood of additional metaphsysics (inside/outside), inter-species >>>> (human-whale, human-machine) illustrations, definitional nuances >>>> (consciousness, awareness, intelligence), and my challenge to the >>>> 'approach' because it excluded 'evidence' from meditation or drugs. >>>> >>>> Although Nick keeps saying he is 'pleased' with responses, I am curious as >>>> to whether or not we are really making progress towards consensus of any >>>> kind. >>>> >>>> But, just in case, responding to Nick's last question to me: >>>> Dusty will look up, at Jackson, as he is receiving a treat, then stand, in >>>> a position I interpret as 'being on alert' and look at Jackson, then at >>>> me, then Jackson, then me (sometimes as many as 4-5 times), then 'staring' >>>> at me. Jackson does something similar, but he will also utter a small >>>> bark/yip while staring. >>>> >>>> davew >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024, at 11:59 AM, steve smith wrote: >>>> > Nick - >>>> >> I must say, I am grateful and pleased by all these testimonials and I >>>> >> am beginning to sense method in my madness. >>>> > I'm glad you were willing able to wade through my gallop of >>>> > observations/reflections/experiences with these two highly central >>>> > creatures in my household. >>>> >> I notice you are much vaguer about Cyd than you are about Hank. >>>> > Very much so, as I experience with many cats, she does not reach as far >>>> > into human psyche/nature to meet me as most dogs (Hank in particular) >>>> > does. >>>> >> So, in your assertion that Cyd is both conscious and self >>>> >> conscious, I am inclined to ask for more details. So the method goes >>>> >> something like this >>>> >> >>>> >> We statt with the intouition that because Cyd does X, Cyd is conscious. >>>> > >>>> > I think you know from my pan-consciousness self-diagnosis that all of >>>> > the things I am inclined to report about Cyd also applies to the >>>> > hummingbirds, the lizards she stalks, and the fish Hank barks at. >>>> > >>>> > Cyd has a very highly adaptive sensorimotor system which not only allows >>>> > her to be good at stalking and catching lizards but also at begging her >>>> > people to let her out to do so, or to give her a helping of "second >>>> > dinners" like the hobbit she channels. She observes, considers, acts, >>>> > observes the consequences of her acts (the book falling from the top of >>>> > the bookcase when she traverses it too rambunctioiusly, the way Mary >>>> > jumps up and lets her out when she hits the right note of plaintive >>>> > meow, the way the lizard freezes when it senses her). This is an >>>> > overwhelming indication of consciousness in my apprehension of the world. >>>> > >>>> > We were implying that an animal's "Love" or "loving relationship with" a >>>> > human familiar had something to do with consciousness. I think that is >>>> > a red-herring, I don't think the lizards love Mary when she frees them >>>> > from Cyd's jaws, but I do think they are acutely conscious. >>>> > >>>> >> From our prior usage of the term, we know that if Cyd is conscious, >>>> >> he will do things A, B, C, D, ....N with greater frequency than >>>> >> otherwise. We check t o see if this is true. Does Sbe? Ifso, we now >>>> >> add Cyd to the list of conscious beings. Now we check to see if >>>> >> other conscious beings do X with greater frequency than non conscious >>>> >> ones. If so, we have added to the list of things that conscious >>>> >> beings do. >>>> > >>>> > See above... A==sense, B==process, C==respond. I don't know that A, >>>> > B, C singularly without both of the others even makes sense. >>>> > >>>> > The fish in the pond are almost continuously in some level of motion, >>>> > they appear to be sensing with their photon and olfactory and >>>> > vibration/pressure-wave sensors. They respond to signals (shadow of >>>> > human or dog looming over pond, insect landing on the surface of the >>>> > pond, bit of high-nutrient food sinking in the pond) by bolting or >>>> > gulping or seeking more input (curiosity). While a lot of their >>>> > processing may be prewired/instinctive, I do believe that part of their >>>> > processing is in support of "learning". The dragonflies who like the >>>> > high-ground of the tips of everything they can alight on seem yet more >>>> > automatic/instinctual yet they appear (because I project?) to learn... >>>> > they appear to become more and more tolerant of my approaching them the >>>> > more I do it? They likely recognize that despite the appeal of the tip >>>> > of my car antennae, the tips of the cat-tails in the pond seem to be >>>> > more appealing given the likely food-flux they can spy and grab from >>>> > that vantage (but this is a just-so projection since I'm not a very >>>> > disciplined naturalist, I really have nothing but anecdotal >>>> > observations). >>>> > >>>> > So perhaps D might be "learn"... >>>> > >>>> > Which takes me to the trees and bushes I feel a strong >>>> > affinity/familiarity with. Do they A, B, C (and even D?). I say yes. >>>> > They don't have lenses over their photo-receptors, but since their >>>> > primary/singular energy gathering activity is photonic/light, they >>>> > clearly sense light. They also seem to be able to extend root growth >>>> > toward water and nutrients, or along same said nutrients... this >>>> > represents A and C as does growth "reaching" growth out from under the >>>> > shade to gather more light? What about B? B would seem to be entirely >>>> > pre-wired processing, not adaptive at the scale of the individual >>>> > single-lifetime organism? Which spills over to "learning" (D) which >>>> > maybe isn't happening at the scale of the individual... does a branch or >>>> > root keep "reaching" even if it gets stymied over and over? I'm not >>>> > sure. So if B and even D are required for "consciousness" then perhaps >>>> > it is only a population of such organisms and the germline phenotypic >>>> > expression which we must acknowledge some level of "proto-consciousness" >>>> > to? >>>> > >>>> > To go on down the line of lower-and lower complexity entities or systems >>>> > i'd have to grasp further and seek the existing guidance of others in >>>> > the pan-consciousness world who have worked through this in their own >>>> > ways. >>>> > >>>> > Bottom line, is that the "bottom line" of consciousness feels very hard >>>> > for me to even begin to want to draw between Hank and Cyd or where it >>>> > excludes Lizzy or Fishy or DraggyFly or any and all of the >>>> > yet-less-familiar creatures they stalk and eat. Interesting that all of >>>> > these are predators, no? >>>> > >>>> > Yet another free-associateve gallop? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>>> > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>> > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>> > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>> > archives: 5/2017 thru present >>>> > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>>> > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>>> >>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Nicholas S. Thompson >>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology >>> Clark University >>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >> >> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> archives: 5/2017 thru present >> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > > > -- > Nicholas S. Thompson > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology > Clark University > -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
