Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by SteveKlinko »

Belindi wrote: April 4th, 2022, 2:16 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: April 2nd, 2022, 8:29 am Let's get to the point of this thread. How does Idealism (any version of it) Explain how Neural Activity produces Conscious Experience? Since Idealism requires a backward Causality Trajectory maybe I should ask: How does Idealism (any version of it) Explain how Conscious Experience produces Neural Activity?
Idealism explains neural activity as yet another construct in a reality that's entirely constructed by mind.

I say "mind" and there are absolute idealists who claim mind too is a construct and there is nothing but experience. This is rather nice BTW as it lets humble experiencers such as earthworms have their little say.
I agree that there is nothing but Conscious Experience for us as Conscious Minds. But Conscious Experiences are the Detection scheme that we use to make sense out of the External Universe which Exists as a separate Phenomenon from the Conscious Mind Phenomenon. I don't buy the Idealist point of view so we really are at an Impasse. I will never understand Idealism (and I have tried for decades), but I suspect that you really do understand my Dualism because it would have to be the only Sensible starting point even for you.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by SteveKlinko »

Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 8th, 2022, 2:09 pm Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.

Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.
"Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view".
There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by SteveKlinko »

Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 8th, 2022, 2:09 pm Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.
"Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view".
There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 9th, 2022, 7:42 am
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 8th, 2022, 2:09 pm Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.
"Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view".
There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.
The dreamed environment is mostly from memories rather than directly from the organs or special sense.

Regarding your second comment; do you mean there is something about colour peception that is more immediate than perception of tangible shapes or weights?

There is a philosophical theory about how colour is a special perception . I tried a google search and failed to find it. I think I remember this theory is mainly of historical interest now. I used to think perception of colour was more immediate until someone reminded me there are scientific instruments that can detect and measure colours.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by SteveKlinko »

Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 9:29 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 9th, 2022, 7:42 am
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 8th, 2022, 2:09 pm Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.
"Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view".
There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.
The dreamed environment is mostly from memories rather than directly from the organs or special sense.
The places and things in my Dreams are mostly not places or things I have seen before and which can be in my Memory. The places and things in my Dreams are usually pretty Weird and Concocted. But some Dreams are of things and places that are from Memory. But the point of all this is not where the Dreams come from (even though that is interesting), but what exactly ARE all the Colors that are projected onto my Visual Experience? What is Color and Conscious Light in general?
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 9:29 am Regarding your second comment; do you mean there is something about colour peception that is more immediate than perception of tangible shapes or weights?

There is a philosophical theory about how colour is a special perception . I tried a google search and failed to find it. I think I remember this theory is mainly of historical interest now. I used to think perception of colour was more immediate until someone reminded me there are scientific instruments that can detect and measure colours.
Exactly, Scientific instruments can Detect and Measure Color, but they never Experience the Color like we do. If an Instrument flashes an indicator labeled Red, I hope you don't think there is any Experience of Redness going on in the Instrument, do you?
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 9th, 2022, 7:42 am
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 8th, 2022, 2:09 pm Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.
"Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view".
There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.

True, dreams are seldom true to life however they are surreal contortions of memories of real places and events.
If you describe something as surreal, you mean that the elements in it are combined in a strange way that you would not normally expect, like in a dream.
Collins Dictionary]

You don't usually need the extra thought to experience pain, or pressure on your skin, or fatigue, or heat/cold, or how to balance yourself when you walk, or even in most circumstances how to handle your car.

On the other hand art colourists , aesthetic gardeners, and fashion masters do give a lot of thought to the use of red , other hues , and shades and tones of red and could not do what they set out to do unless they conceptualise.

Moreover torturers , diagnosticians , and physiotherapists give a lot of thought to degrees and qualities of pain and other discomforts. When a pain is imminent like when the nurse is going to give you a hypodermic jab they tell you "Just a sharp scratch" so the concept of the pain or discomfort does not cause anxiety. Conceptualising sensory information is useful. Testing urine samples etc with litmus paper there is actually a mnemonic rhyme for conceptualising the significance of blue or of red.

A quale may qualify red, other hues, or any other sensory information such as pain or physical effort. Moreover any quale of whatever sort of sensory information is relative to other quale that happen at the same time.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by SteveKlinko »

Belindi wrote: May 10th, 2022, 4:28 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 9th, 2022, 7:42 am
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 8th, 2022, 2:09 pm Added a new paragraph to this section on the website:

Next, I would like to talk about Higher Order Theories of Consciousness with respect to Conscious Experience. There are several different theories that fall into this category, but they all specify that to make a Conscious Experience (first Order) really Conscious, there must be a Secondary Thought (Higher Order) about the original Conscious Experience. So to be specific, they would stipulate that an Experience of Redness cannot become Conscious all by itself because there has to first be a subsequent Higher Order Thought about the Redness such as: "Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view". In my opinion and my own Experience, this is an Incoherent and unnecessary requirement for Experiencing Redness. I simply Experience Redness without any other thoughts attached. In fact, any other Thought about Redness is just an added Distraction from the Redness Experience as a thing in itself. It is incomprehensible to me as to why they need an Extra Order in their Experience of Redness. They must not have the same kind of Visual Experience that I do, and I am tempted to say they must fall into the category of people that might not have Conscious Experience for Color. See https://theintermind.com/#Zombies. But even worse, the theory can never get to an Explanation for any actual Conscious Experience. There is no way this theory can Explain what the IM is within the theory. How does this theory Explain any Conscious Experience?
Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.
"Oh look there is something Red out there in my field of view".
There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.

True, dreams are seldom true to life however they are surreal contortions of memories of real places and events.
If you describe something as surreal, you mean that the elements in it are combined in a strange way that you would not normally expect, like in a dream.
Collins Dictionary]

You don't usually need the extra thought to experience pain, or pressure on your skin, or fatigue, or heat/cold, or how to balance yourself when you walk, or even in most circumstances how to handle your car.

On the other hand art colourists , aesthetic gardeners, and fashion masters do give a lot of thought to the use of red , other hues , and shades and tones of red and could not do what they set out to do unless they conceptualise.

Moreover torturers , diagnosticians , and physiotherapists give a lot of thought to degrees and qualities of pain and other discomforts. When a pain is imminent like when the nurse is going to give you a hypodermic jab they tell you "Just a sharp scratch" so the concept of the pain or discomfort does not cause anxiety. Conceptualising sensory information is useful. Testing urine samples etc with litmus paper there is actually a mnemonic rhyme for conceptualising the significance of blue or of red.

A quale may qualify red, other hues, or any other sensory information such as pain or physical effort. Moreover any quale of whatever sort of sensory information is relative to other quale that happen at the same time.
Of course Artists give a lot of thought about Colors when choosing them for their work. But that is not what I am talking about. The issue was that in order for someone to Experience a Color they need to think about it a little. I maintain that you simply Directly and Immediately Experience it. The Context of the particular Color that you are Experiencing is Irrelevant. It is the Color that you Experience, whatever it is, that is the issue. It doesn't matter what optical illusion is pre processing the Color. There will be that final Color that you Experience. What is that Color Experience? That is always the question that Science cannot answer.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 10th, 2022, 7:15 am
Belindi wrote: May 10th, 2022, 4:28 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 9th, 2022, 7:42 am
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am

Conscious awareness of red is undoubtedly experience. It's also subjective experience as someone may be red/green colour blind. Someone else may not value colour experiences. Someone else may have a psychedelic experience of red.

What all these subjective experiences of red have in common is, in order to have the experience, there must be something in the subject's environment to be experienced.
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.
Belindi wrote: May 9th, 2022, 4:43 am Spinoza said mind is experience of the body. (I.e. organs of special sense such as the eyes or the taste buds) . Body and mind are two components of the same experience. Body is obviously part of the physical sphere, i.e extended matter, that includes air and food, plants and other people, optical conditions for colour awareness.

There are three specially important function words in that sentence: 'is', ' there', and 'my'.

'Is' implies immediate presence. 'There' implies an environment for the thought. 'My' implies a subject of the thought. The absolute idealist claims all of these functions are subjective. If the speaker is scientific they may exclaim "Oh look the chemistry of that paint is such that it makes it possible for us to see red. " If the scientific speaker is also an absolute idealist they may add "Mind you, the theories of optics and of paint chemistry are products of mind. Nobody knows what is 'out there' except that, without mind as pattern maker, it's sheer chaos."
But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.

True, dreams are seldom true to life however they are surreal contortions of memories of real places and events.
If you describe something as surreal, you mean that the elements in it are combined in a strange way that you would not normally expect, like in a dream.
Collins Dictionary]

You don't usually need the extra thought to experience pain, or pressure on your skin, or fatigue, or heat/cold, or how to balance yourself when you walk, or even in most circumstances how to handle your car.

On the other hand art colourists , aesthetic gardeners, and fashion masters do give a lot of thought to the use of red , other hues , and shades and tones of red and could not do what they set out to do unless they conceptualise.

Moreover torturers , diagnosticians , and physiotherapists give a lot of thought to degrees and qualities of pain and other discomforts. When a pain is imminent like when the nurse is going to give you a hypodermic jab they tell you "Just a sharp scratch" so the concept of the pain or discomfort does not cause anxiety. Conceptualising sensory information is useful. Testing urine samples etc with litmus paper there is actually a mnemonic rhyme for conceptualising the significance of blue or of red.

A quale may qualify red, other hues, or any other sensory information such as pain or physical effort. Moreover any quale of whatever sort of sensory information is relative to other quale that happen at the same time.
Of course Artists give a lot of thought about Colors when choosing them for their work. But that is not what I am talking about. The issue was that in order for someone to Experience a Color they need to think about it a little. I maintain that you simply Directly and Immediately Experience it. The Context of the particular Color that you are Experiencing is Irrelevant. It is the Color that you Experience, whatever it is, that is the issue. It doesn't matter what optical illusion is pre processing the Color. There will be that final Color that you Experience. What is that Color Experience? That is always the question that Science cannot answer.
Always the perceiving subject is active and unlike a camera is not passive. This means that no quale, whether a colour quale or not, is the creation of the perceiving subject. You are not a camera you are active, and the relationship between whatever chemistry causes the stimulus and your active mind is the quale you see, whether or not you also conceptualise it.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by SteveKlinko »

Belindi wrote: May 10th, 2022, 3:09 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 10th, 2022, 7:15 am
Belindi wrote: May 10th, 2022, 4:28 am
SteveKlinko wrote: May 9th, 2022, 7:42 am
There is nothing out there to be Experienced in your environment when you are Dreaming. The Colors can be very good.


But what I was trying to say is that you don't need the extra thought to be able to Experience the Redness. The Redness is Directly and Immediately Experienced.

True, dreams are seldom true to life however they are surreal contortions of memories of real places and events.
If you describe something as surreal, you mean that the elements in it are combined in a strange way that you would not normally expect, like in a dream.
Collins Dictionary]

You don't usually need the extra thought to experience pain, or pressure on your skin, or fatigue, or heat/cold, or how to balance yourself when you walk, or even in most circumstances how to handle your car.

On the other hand art colourists , aesthetic gardeners, and fashion masters do give a lot of thought to the use of red , other hues , and shades and tones of red and could not do what they set out to do unless they conceptualise.

Moreover torturers , diagnosticians , and physiotherapists give a lot of thought to degrees and qualities of pain and other discomforts. When a pain is imminent like when the nurse is going to give you a hypodermic jab they tell you "Just a sharp scratch" so the concept of the pain or discomfort does not cause anxiety. Conceptualising sensory information is useful. Testing urine samples etc with litmus paper there is actually a mnemonic rhyme for conceptualising the significance of blue or of red.

A quale may qualify red, other hues, or any other sensory information such as pain or physical effort. Moreover any quale of whatever sort of sensory information is relative to other quale that happen at the same time.
Of course Artists give a lot of thought about Colors when choosing them for their work. But that is not what I am talking about. The issue was that in order for someone to Experience a Color they need to think about it a little. I maintain that you simply Directly and Immediately Experience it. The Context of the particular Color that you are Experiencing is Irrelevant. It is the Color that you Experience, whatever it is, that is the issue. It doesn't matter what optical illusion is pre processing the Color. There will be that final Color that you Experience. What is that Color Experience? That is always the question that Science cannot answer.
Always the perceiving subject is active and unlike a camera is not passive. This means that no quale, whether a colour quale or not, is the creation of the perceiving subject. You are not a camera you are active, and the relationship between whatever chemistry causes the stimulus and your active mind is the quale you see, whether or not you also conceptualise it.
But since that Color is generated inside you, that Color is part of what you are. You are the Experience of Redness, Greenness, Blueness etc. You are the Light that you Experience.
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 11th, 2022, 7:51 am
Belindi wrote: May 10th, 2022, 3:09 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 10th, 2022, 7:15 am
Belindi wrote: May 10th, 2022, 4:28 am


True, dreams are seldom true to life however they are surreal contortions of memories of real places and events.
Collins Dictionary]

You don't usually need the extra thought to experience pain, or pressure on your skin, or fatigue, or heat/cold, or how to balance yourself when you walk, or even in most circumstances how to handle your car.

On the other hand art colourists , aesthetic gardeners, and fashion masters do give a lot of thought to the use of red , other hues , and shades and tones of red and could not do what they set out to do unless they conceptualise.

Moreover torturers , diagnosticians , and physiotherapists give a lot of thought to degrees and qualities of pain and other discomforts. When a pain is imminent like when the nurse is going to give you a hypodermic jab they tell you "Just a sharp scratch" so the concept of the pain or discomfort does not cause anxiety. Conceptualising sensory information is useful. Testing urine samples etc with litmus paper there is actually a mnemonic rhyme for conceptualising the significance of blue or of red.

A quale may qualify red, other hues, or any other sensory information such as pain or physical effort. Moreover any quale of whatever sort of sensory information is relative to other quale that happen at the same time.
Of course Artists give a lot of thought about Colors when choosing them for their work. But that is not what I am talking about. The issue was that in order for someone to Experience a Color they need to think about it a little. I maintain that you simply Directly and Immediately Experience it. The Context of the particular Color that you are Experiencing is Irrelevant. It is the Color that you Experience, whatever it is, that is the issue. It doesn't matter what optical illusion is pre processing the Color. There will be that final Color that you Experience. What is that Color Experience? That is always the question that Science cannot answer.
Always the perceiving subject is active and unlike a camera is not passive. This means that no quale, whether a colour quale or not, is the creation of the perceiving subject. You are not a camera you are active, and the relationship between whatever chemistry causes the stimulus and your active mind is the quale you see, whether or not you also conceptualise it.
But since that Color is generated inside you, that Color is part of what you are. You are the Experience of Redness, Greenness, Blueness etc. You are the Light that you Experience.
Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree and this conversation has been productive. "You are the Light that you Experience." sums it up.
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Consul »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 11th, 2022, 7:51 amBut since that Color is generated inside you, that Color is part of what you are. You are the Experience of Redness, Greenness, Blueness etc. You are the Light that you Experience.
Color-experiences are part of my mind; but, using John Foster's distinction between mental items (items of mentality) and mental subjects (subjects of mentality), color-experiences are mental items, whereas I qua mental subject am not a mental item or a complex of mental items.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

Consul wrote: May 11th, 2022, 2:51 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 11th, 2022, 7:51 amBut since that Color is generated inside you, that Color is part of what you are. You are the Experience of Redness, Greenness, Blueness etc. You are the Light that you Experience.
Color-experiences are part of my mind; but, using John Foster's distinction between mental items (items of mentality) and mental subjects (subjects of mentality), color-experiences are mental items, whereas I qua mental subject am not a mental item or a complex of mental items.
What does "my" signify in your first sentence? If experiences are other than you who has experiences, what sort of ontological being are you? Are you extended matter with a mind or a soul embodied in it? Are you a mind that creates the idea of extended matter?
User avatar
Consul
Posts: 6036
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Consul »

Belindi wrote: May 11th, 2022, 3:03 pmWhat does "my" signify in your first sentence? If experiences are other than you who has experiences, what sort of ontological being are you? Are you extended matter with a mind or a soul embodied in it? Are you a mind that creates the idea of extended matter?
I am a human animal, and my mind is my brain.
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 6105
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why All Current Scientific Theories Of Consciousness Fail

Post by Belindi »

Consul wrote: May 11th, 2022, 3:09 pm
Belindi wrote: May 11th, 2022, 3:03 pmWhat does "my" signify in your first sentence? If experiences are other than you who has experiences, what sort of ontological being are you? Are you extended matter with a mind or a soul embodied in it? Are you a mind that creates the idea of extended matter?
I am a human animal, and my mind is my brain.
The objection to the identity theory of mind and brain is brain and mind have different attributes.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

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

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021