The Great Embarrassment Of Science
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
The Great Embarrassment Of Science
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
"Who cares, wins"
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
The brain is extremely complex and, as P-C suggests, there is much yet to find out about its operation. This is not at all embarrassing to science - which is a field and no more prone to emotions than the economy, which has far more legitimate grounds for self-flagellation than science.
Nor are scientists embarrassed because there is no shame in their failure to be omniscient.
What you are referring to is that neuroscience - a field in its infancy - has not solved Chalmers's hard problem of consciousness.
My own guess is that the source of qualia - the gutbucket punch of consciousness - is generated by body systems that life requires - metabolism/respiration/distribution. Note that that most life forms do just fine without brains, or even nervous systems, although there are always analogues, because all organisms sense their environment or themselves to some extent.
That raw sensation of life is "felt" via the nervous system, bringing about what we call qualia - according to my current guesstimates.
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
I said the Embarrassment is in the Cover Up of the lack of understanding, not in the lack of understanding itself. As long as prominent Scientists and writers claim that Consciousness is an Illusion (does not exist) there will never be progress with Consciousness. Why try to study something that is not even Real?Sy Borg wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 8:36 pm I consider the fixation on vision as a proxy for consciousness to be a common philosophical failure, that discounts other senses, not to mention the existence of synaesthesia. Thus, Mary's Room fails to take into account the interactions between different sensory stimuli. There is no isolated visual experience per se, but a general experience which contains feedback about electromagnetic energy vibrating at around vicinity 400 – 790 teraHertz, amongst feedback regarding many other aspects of reality.
The brain is extremely complex and, as P-C suggests, there is much yet to find out about its operation. This is not at all embarrassing to science - which is a field and no more prone to emotions than the economy, which has far more legitimate grounds for self-flagellation than science.
Nor are scientists embarrassed because there is no shame in their failure to be omniscient.
What you are referring to is that neuroscience - a field in its infancy - has not solved Chalmers's hard problem of consciousness.
My own guess is that the source of qualia - the gutbucket punch of consciousness - is generated by body systems that life requires - metabolism/respiration/distribution. Note that that most life forms do just fine without brains, or even nervous systems, although there are always analogues, because all organisms sense their environment or themselves to some extent.
That raw sensation of life is "felt" via the nervous system, bringing about what we call qualia - according to my current guesstimates.
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
But it is different with Consciousness. Consciousness is what we Are. This makes it special and deserved of a separate category of things that Science doesn't understand.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:06 pm There is much that science, or Science, cannot explain...
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
No one in science finds this embarrassing. I suppose the main reason is that we have no need to measure it since it is the essence of our personal experience and nothing more would be learned by measuring what we know already.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 11:26 am The Conscious Visual Experience, especially Conscious Color, is not studied by Science, because Scientists have not found a way to study it. Scientists cannot directly Measure it because there are no Conscious Visual Experience detectors, and Scientists do not know how to design such detectors. Instead, Scientists have been forced to at least ignore the Conscious Visual Experience, and at worst to completely deny the existence of the Conscious Visual Experience. Because of this unscientific behavior, Consciousness remains a huge Skeleton In The Closet for Science. This Gap in understanding Conscious Experience is, and should be, an Embarrassment for Science. Not because Science cannot Explain it, but because Science is trying to hide and cover up the fact that Science cannot Explain it. It is actually very disappointing to me that, that is the case.
We need not search for a way to study what we already study without effort.
What is more interesting is the physical conditions that we sense, and science is doing very well unpacking objective information about that all the time.
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
It is Embarrassing to Science if they don't even realize the Embarrassment of it. We know our individual Conscious Experiences happen, but we don't know what another persons Experience is like. And we don't really know what our own Conscious Experience is, even though we know it Exists. It would be a big mistake to just Believe that our Experiences are all alike. I want to make Conscious Machines. I cannot do it with the current state of unknowing within Science. I am an Engineer and I depend on Scientists discovering things that I can incorporate into practical products.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 8:17 amNo one in science finds this embarrassing. I suppose the main reason is that we have no need to measure it since it is the essence of our personal experience and nothing more would be learned by measuring what we know already.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 11:26 am The Conscious Visual Experience, especially Conscious Color, is not studied by Science, because Scientists have not found a way to study it. Scientists cannot directly Measure it because there are no Conscious Visual Experience detectors, and Scientists do not know how to design such detectors. Instead, Scientists have been forced to at least ignore the Conscious Visual Experience, and at worst to completely deny the existence of the Conscious Visual Experience. Because of this unscientific behavior, Consciousness remains a huge Skeleton In The Closet for Science. This Gap in understanding Conscious Experience is, and should be, an Embarrassment for Science. Not because Science cannot Explain it, but because Science is trying to hide and cover up the fact that Science cannot Explain it. It is actually very disappointing to me that, that is the case.
We need not search for a way to study what we already study without effort.
What is more interesting is the physical conditions that we sense, and science is doing very well unpacking objective information about that all the time.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
You probably already have done. Are they at school yet? :)
Seriously, your wish is akin to Musk wanting to build settlements on Mars. The technology is not there at this stage, and it's uncertain if it ever will be.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:06 pm There is much that science, or Science, cannot explain...
When it comes to this, I think there are two, and only two, categories we need. One is for those things that science doesn't currently understand, like maybe how electromagnetic radiation propagates as waves, but also as particle streams. And then there's gravity... Such things may be understood in the future.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 7:24 am But it is different with Consciousness. Consciousness is what we Are. This makes it special and deserved of a separate category of things that Science doesn't understand.
Then there is the second category, those things that are outside the scope of science, like maybe how we could be brains-in-vats. Science cannot, and will never, understand these things.
"Who cares, wins"
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
In my own small way, I am trying to make it happen.
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
I think Science can understand everything, but they need to get out of their little Physicalist Fantasy Worlds.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 4:06 amPattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 1:06 pm There is much that science, or Science, cannot explain...When it comes to this, I think there are two, and only two, categories we need. One is for those things that science doesn't currently understand, like maybe how electromagnetic radiation propagates as waves, but also as particle streams. And then there's gravity... Such things may be understood in the future.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 7:24 am But it is different with Consciousness. Consciousness is what we Are. This makes it special and deserved of a separate category of things that Science doesn't understand.
Then there is the second category, those things that are outside the scope of science, like maybe how we could be brains-in-vats. Science cannot, and will never, understand these things.
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
Science cannot even begin to examine or investigate a problem that comes without sufficient evidence of a 'scientific' standard, or even with no evidence at all. Thus, science cannot understand "everything". The only refutation sciencists have come up with for this is that such problems are not worthy of consideration. Not worthy! Since when has unworthiness ever influenced the course of human enquiry? Since we do feel the need to investigate such issues, we use the techniques of serious thinking/thought that have always been there, outside of science.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 10:46 am I think Science can understand everything, but they need to get out of their little Physicalist Fantasy Worlds.
"Who cares, wins"
-
- Posts: 710
- Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
I agree, Science is not even trying. So we must Speculate.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 10:55 amScience cannot even begin to examine or investigate a problem that comes without sufficient evidence of a 'scientific' standard, or even with no evidence at all. Thus, science cannot understand "everything". The only refutation sciencists have come up with for this is that such problems are not worthy of consideration. Not worthy! Since when has unworthiness ever influenced the course of human enquiry? Since we do feel the need to investigate such issues, we use the techniques of serious thinking/thought that have always been there, outside of science.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 10:46 am I think Science can understand everything, but they need to get out of their little Physicalist Fantasy Worlds.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
The answer is simple: become a scientist and figure it out where all of those losers have failed, then you won't have to be embarrassed anymore.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 9:06 amIt is Embarrassing to Science if they don't even realize the Embarrassment of it. We know our individual Conscious Experiences happen, but we don't know what another persons Experience is like. And we don't really know what our own Conscious Experience is, even though we know it Exists. It would be a big mistake to just Believe that our Experiences are all alike. I want to make Conscious Machines. I cannot do it with the current state of unknowing within Science. I am an Engineer and I depend on Scientists discovering things that I can incorporate into practical products.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑May 29th, 2022, 8:17 amNo one in science finds this embarrassing. I suppose the main reason is that we have no need to measure it since it is the essence of our personal experience and nothing more would be learned by measuring what we know already.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 28th, 2022, 11:26 am The Conscious Visual Experience, especially Conscious Color, is not studied by Science, because Scientists have not found a way to study it. Scientists cannot directly Measure it because there are no Conscious Visual Experience detectors, and Scientists do not know how to design such detectors. Instead, Scientists have been forced to at least ignore the Conscious Visual Experience, and at worst to completely deny the existence of the Conscious Visual Experience. Because of this unscientific behavior, Consciousness remains a huge Skeleton In The Closet for Science. This Gap in understanding Conscious Experience is, and should be, an Embarrassment for Science. Not because Science cannot Explain it, but because Science is trying to hide and cover up the fact that Science cannot Explain it. It is actually very disappointing to me that, that is the case.
We need not search for a way to study what we already study without effort.
What is more interesting is the physical conditions that we sense, and science is doing very well unpacking objective information about that all the time.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14997
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: The Great Embarrassment Of Science
It seems to me that there is a conceptual blind spot because we humans are examining the functions of our own bodies, and we tend to see ourselves as a single, seamless whole. The self. The personality. However, the self is an end product.SteveKlinko wrote: ↑May 30th, 2022, 10:42 amIn my own small way, I am trying to make it happen.
Each individual is akin to a planet, with numerous microbial ecosystems, counting cells as hyper-integrated microbial communities, like the "humans" of the single celled world.
While all of these communities appear to be cooperating, they are actually competing but have achieved a power balance. The communities compete in much the same way as local councils compete for state and federal revenue. Generally speaking, a council won't say no if pork barrelling politicians happen to give them inordinate share of funding at the expense of other councils.
Once a person dies, their cooperative communities of gut single-celled organisms will eat the dying cells that line the stomach. Allies one day, food the next. Earlier in evolutionary history, the communities that make up the gut and the reproductive systems were most important, and the job of brains was to help to feel and to protect these primary body communities. In humans, the roles are reversed. There's been a takeover, where the brain has become the locus of existence, and job of the metabolic communities is largely to feed the brain. In humans, the brain comprises 2% of total mass, but it consumed 20% of the body's energy.
Not sure where this is going, just riffing to see what angles emerge ...
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023