Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

What you think about how you think.
SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:04 pm

Scientists can describe the Neural Activity that occurs in the Brain when we See. But they seem to be completely puzzled by the Conscious Visual experience that we have that is correlated with the Neural Activity. Incredibly, some even come to the conclusion that the Conscious experience is not even necessary! They can not find the Conscious experience in the Neurons so the experience must not have any function in the Visual process. They believe that the Neural Activity is sufficient for us to move around in the world without bumping into things. This is insane denial of the obvious purpose for Visual Consciousness. The Conscious Visual experience is the thing that allows us to move around in the world. Neural Activity is not enough. We would be blind without the Conscious Visual experience. The Conscious Visual experience contains vast amounts of information about the external world all packed up into a single thing.

Scientists should not disregard the Conscious Visual experience. It's just another type of Data that can be analyzed. We should call it Conscious Data. We use and analyze this Conscious Visual Data all the time without realizing it. For example when I reach for my coffee mug I have a Conscious Visual experience where I See my hand moving toward the coffee mug. If My hand is off track I sense this in the Conscious Visual experience and adjust the movement of my hand. If I did not have the Conscious Visual experience I would not be able to pick up my coffee mug, or at least it would be much more difficult with just Neural Activity. So the Conscious Visual experience is just Data that helps us interact with the world. This Conscious Visual Data is absolutely necessary for us to function. Similar arguments can be made for the Conscious Auditory experience, the Conscious Smell experience, the Conscious Taste experience, and the Conscious Touch experience. All these experiences are just a type of Data that our Conscious Minds can analyze.

User avatar
Io
Poster
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Io » Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:34 pm

Probably the only reason we think consciousness is important to doing anything is that we have it, and we think everything we have is important. We're like that, you know.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11685
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by landrew » Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:42 pm

We know that some conscious experiences are entirely false. False memories are a well-documented phenomenon. DMT experiments have caused people to have convincing abduction experiences with extraterrestrials, while they were lying in a table while in a lab the whole time. We know that dreams aren't real, but we believe they're real at the time.

Consciousness is the end product of a series of processing steps, any of which can be supplemented with missing data, sometimes to the point of a complete fabrication by the brain.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13342
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 21, 2019 5:26 am

Steve has previously expressed crackpot opinions based on his idea that scientists cannot understand how we perceive something. Not worth getting upset about because no reply will break through his fixed opinion.

There are an estimated 100 trillion synapse connections in the human brain, and it will be a long time, maybe centuries, before the function of each is understood. In the mean time, let's not let a religious activist disturb us.

mack_10
Poster
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:30 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by mack_10 » Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:17 pm

Can we limit klinko to just one thread - he is just stringing together random ideas now

User avatar
Io
Poster
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Io » Fri Jun 21, 2019 1:24 pm

Maybe each thread that he starts is like a single synapse and he's been seemingly randomly seeding them here for ages. One day all of those ideas will suddenly string together into one giant forum-brain and take over the board as a single super-artificial-intelligence called SteveKlinkoTM :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Actually, thinking about it, if that were possible gorgeous would have taken over long ago.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11685
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by landrew » Fri Jun 21, 2019 1:38 pm

In all fairness, he may be thinking we all keep missing the point, but most likely, he has tunnel vision about his ridiculous idea.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Pyrrho
Administrator
Posts: 9999
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 12:31 am

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Pyrrho » Fri Jun 21, 2019 2:10 pm

The OP is a classic example of the Strawman Fallacy.
For any forum questions or concerns please e-mail skepticforum@gmail.com or send a PM.

The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.

User avatar
Dimebag
Regular Poster
Posts: 889
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Dimebag » Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:04 am

I don’t think even Daniel Dennett has outright claimed that conscious experience doesn’t exist. He has claimed it is illusory. Steve, I think it would be helpful if you could provide some supporting documents or links to support your claim that neuroscience denies conscious experience.

I think neuroscience wants to understand conscious experience, even if it might be ill equipped to attempt such an understanding. There are definitely pockets within neuroscience that possess both the humility to be able to admit of our ignorance of the subject, as well as the open mindedness in order to look for an inroad. This will continue and obviously the underlying general work within neuroscience will pave their way. The easy problem will be their focus until such time as it becomes well understood enough to make headway on the hard problem, which may just be a matter of solving the easy problem.

The problem is that of ignorance. We can’t possibly fathom how conscious experience can emerge from our grey matter, so instead we must allow evidence guide the way. It is the only way to progress. We can hypothesise, but without (at least in theory) testable predictions, any guess will likely be way off the mark. No one could have guessed how life emerges from non life, as it is so complex it is essentially impossible to come up with such an idea out of thin air. So we must resist the urge to try, and instead wait until we can begin to assemble a hypothesis from sound knowledge.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:48 pm

Io wrote:
Fri Jun 21, 2019 1:24 pm
Maybe each thread that he starts is like a single synapse and he's been seemingly randomly seeding them here for ages. One day all of those ideas will suddenly string together into one giant forum-brain and take over the board as a single super-artificial-intelligence called SteveKlinkoTM :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Actually, thinking about it, if that were possible gorgeous would have taken over long ago.
Hahhhh! I'll try to throttle back my Super Powers.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Jun 23, 2019 2:57 pm

Dimebag wrote:
Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:04 am
I don’t think even Daniel Dennett has outright claimed that conscious experience doesn’t exist. He has claimed it is illusory. Steve, I think it would be helpful if you could provide some supporting documents or links to support your claim that neuroscience denies conscious experience.

I think neuroscience wants to understand conscious experience, even if it might be ill equipped to attempt such an understanding. There are definitely pockets within neuroscience that possess both the humility to be able to admit of our ignorance of the subject, as well as the open mindedness in order to look for an inroad. This will continue and obviously the underlying general work within neuroscience will pave their way. The easy problem will be their focus until such time as it becomes well understood enough to make headway on the hard problem, which may just be a matter of solving the easy problem.

The problem is that of ignorance. We can’t possibly fathom how conscious experience can emerge from our grey matter, so instead we must allow evidence guide the way. It is the only way to progress. We can hypothesise, but without (at least in theory) testable predictions, any guess will likely be way off the mark. No one could have guessed how life emerges from non life, as it is so complex it is essentially impossible to come up with such an idea out of thin air. So we must resist the urge to try, and instead wait until we can begin to assemble a hypothesis from sound knowledge.
I qualified it by saying only Some people claim that Conscious Experience does not exist. Didn't say Everybody. But there is a further problem with a lot of people saying that they can not understand Why we even have Conscious Experience. They think that the Neural Activity is sufficient. They completely miss the concept that the Visual Experience, for example, is a further processing stage that is absolutely necessary for moving around in the Real World. The Neural Processing alone is not enough.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11685
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by landrew » Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:26 pm

The ubiquitous, invariable nature of your postings has given us an unintended opportunity to analyze your central thesis, and it's apparently based on a few fundamentally flawed assumptions. You seem to think that simple sensory input constitutes consciousness. But consciousness requires a decision-making entity at the center of those sensory inputs, which can analyse them and make decisions whether to react or not.

An analogy would be a comparison between an automated factory, and one where a human being sits at the control panel, acquiring situational awareness, making decisions and taking appropriate actions. Automatons make programmed decisions, and then process data in a limited and predictable way.

Simple organisms are automatons, hardwired to make basic decisions, based on sensory inputs. Higher organisms have more and more central processing, but apparently only a human being is capable of making imaginary models and running simulations, so that behaviors can be analyzed in depth before committing them to action.

It may be a total mystery how the brain achieves consciousness, but defining it isn't hard at all.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13342
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Lance Kennedy » Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:41 pm

Steve

Your thesis is a variation on the argument :"We do not know, therefore God."

We do not know how neural processing achieves all it does. But that does not mean we can say "therefore supernatural." Much better to say "therefore more research."

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:08 pm

landrew wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:26 pm
The ubiquitous, invariable nature of your postings has given us an unintended opportunity to analyze your central thesis, and it's apparently based on a few fundamentally flawed assumptions. You seem to think that simple sensory input constitutes consciousness. But consciousness requires a decision-making entity at the center of those sensory inputs, which can analyse them and make decisions whether to react or not.

An analogy would be a comparison between an automated factory, and one where a human being sits at the control panel, acquiring situational awareness, making decisions and taking appropriate actions. Automatons make programmed decisions, and then process data in a limited and predictable way.

Simple organisms are automatons, hardwired to make basic decisions, based on sensory inputs. Higher organisms have more and more central processing, but apparently only a human being is capable of making imaginary models and running simulations, so that behaviors can be analyzed in depth before committing them to action.

It may be a total mystery how the brain achieves consciousness, but defining it isn't hard at all.
Nowhere do I say that Sensory Input is the only thing that constitutes Consciousness. But I think you can study separate components of Consciousness without studying the whole thing all at the same time. I am interested in Sensory Perception so I concentrate my efforts on that. I think you can study Visual Perception, Auditory Perception, etc. as separate distinct Phenomenon. I am not interested in Decision Making. Decision Making is irrelevant to the basic question of How we have a Visual Perception in the first place.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:18 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:41 pm
Steve

Your thesis is a variation on the argument :"We do not know, therefore God."

We do not know how neural processing achieves all it does. But that does not mean we can say "therefore supernatural." Much better to say "therefore more research."
You cannot tell me what known Phenomenon of Science can explain the Experience of Redness that we have. The Redness is clearly not part of any known Category of Science. Like all Conscious Experiences, Redness and all the Colors are very Mysterious if you truthfully think more Deeply about them. What is that Redness or Greenness or Blueness that you have always Seen? At this point in time we can only say that Colors are Super Scientific but I wouldn't say they are Super Natural.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13342
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Lance Kennedy » Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:35 am

In other words, we do not know, therefore God.

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:21 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:35 am
In other words, we do not know, therefore God.
You must think that Science knows everything there is to know. Science does not know everything. Science is always expanding it's knowledge. The fact that Science cannot explain Conscious Experience does not prove that Conscious Experience has no Explanation. It only proves that Science has not figured it out yet. When I say Super Science I mean it is beyond Current Science not beyond some future more developed Science.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10970
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Poodle » Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:49 pm

SteveKlinko wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 10:21 am
... I mean it is beyond Current Science not beyond some future more developed Science.
... and due to be discovered in April next year.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13342
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by Lance Kennedy » Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:46 pm

Steve

I have told you several times that science does NOT know everything. But there is one thing science has that is absent from religion. It is called honest humility. Honesty is vital in science and absent from religion. A good scientist will always honestly admit when something is not known. The religious nut case will be dishonest and claim to know and claim it is all about God when he or she has no freaking idea.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19686
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:04 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:46 pm
A good scientist will always honestly admit when something is not known.
Yea verily, hypothetically speaking.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

SteveKlinko
Regular Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Insane Denial Of Conscious Experience

Post by SteveKlinko » Wed Jun 26, 2019 10:43 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:46 pm
Steve

I have told you several times that science does NOT know everything. But there is one thing science has that is absent from religion. It is called honest humility. Honesty is vital in science and absent from religion. A good scientist will always honestly admit when something is not known. The religious nut case will be dishonest and claim to know and claim it is all about God when he or she has no freaking idea.
I agree.