Philosophy Now Forum

Dimebag wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 11:36 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:49 am

SteveKlinko wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:23 pm I can and do Experience Redness. You are playing your usual Skepdick Game when you ask "What is Causality?" I don't feel like playing today.

Obviously you experience Redness. But you also experience causality, do you not?

So if you are going to be asking the question "what causes the experience of redness?" why aren't you similarly asking the question "what causes the experience of causality?

Why are you discriminating against experiences?

As per Steveklinko’s initial question as per the hard problem of consciousness,

1) neurons fire in the brain,
2) an experience of red happens,

You say causality has to be explained between the two, I say, we need to expand on the mechanisms of 1). It’s not know if there is even any difference between 1 and 2. 1 is very vague.

My question would be, what separates neurons firing in the brain between two different sensory experiences, like the colour of red or the taste of coffee? If it’s purely neurons firing which is responsible for each different experience, then there is obviously more going on than JUST neurons firing. There is probably a LOT more going on than we know, and that is probably where the answer to how 2 emerges from 1.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 11:36 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:49 am

SteveKlinko wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:23 pm I can and do Experience Redness. You are playing your usual Skepdick Game when you ask "What is Causality?" I don't feel like playing today.

Obviously you experience Redness. But you also experience causality, do you not?

So if you are going to be asking the question "what causes the experience of redness?" why aren't you similarly asking the question "what causes the experience of causality?

Why are you discriminating against experiences?

As per Steveklinko’s initial question as per the hard problem of consciousness,

1) neurons fire in the brain,
2) an experience of red happens,

You say causality has to be explained between the two, I say, we need to expand on the mechanisms of 1). It’s not know if there is even any difference between 1 and 2. 1 is very vague.

My question would be, what separates neurons firing in the brain between two different sensory experiences, like the colour of red or the taste of coffee? If it’s purely neurons firing which is responsible for each different experience, then there is obviously more going on than JUST neurons firing. There is probably a LOT more going on than we know, and that is probably where the answer to how 2 emerges from 1.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:58 pm

Dimebag wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 11:36 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 01, 2020 8:49 am
Obviously you experience Redness. But you also experience causality, do you not?

So if you are going to be asking the question "what causes the experience of redness?" why aren't you similarly asking the question "what causes the experience of causality?

Why are you discriminating against experiences?

As per Steveklinko’s initial question as per the hard problem of consciousness,

1) neurons fire in the brain,
2) an experience of red happens,

You say causality has to be explained between the two, I say, we need to expand on the mechanisms of 1). It’s not know if there is even any difference between 1 and 2. 1 is very vague.

My question would be, what separates neurons firing in the brain between two different sensory experiences, like the colour of red or the taste of coffee? If it’s purely neurons firing which is responsible for each different experience, then there is obviously more going on than JUST neurons firing. There is probably a LOT more going on than we know, and that is probably where the answer to how 2 emerges from 1.

And you would be asking a stupid question.

How do you know that neurons fire in the brain? Isn't that like... an experience. Or something.

The very thing you are trying to explain.

So I am getting straight to the point: explain how explanations work.

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:48 pm You can explain by analogy or by mechanism. Analogy sees consistencies between different things which have similar functioning, mechanism or reductionism seeks to understand constituent parts and their behaviour.

The question is, how does subjective experience emerge from the behaviour of neural interactions? You think you know everything about neurons, you don’t. Neuroscience is constantly learning more about the sheer complexity of the brain. It seems the proteins which make up each synapse combine to form different kinds of synapses, which, have been compared to computers, each synapse is like a computer, storing information and performing operations on that information.

All that is to say, we don’t understand how consciousness could emerge from the brain, because we don’t even know the brain, let alone its functioning, let alone how it functions or what it does.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:05 am

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:48 pm You can explain by analogy or by mechanism. Analogy sees consistencies between different things which have similar functioning, mechanism or reductionism seeks to understand constituent parts and their behaviour.

The question is, how does subjective experience emerge from the behaviour of neural interactions? You think you know everything about neurons, you don’t. Neuroscience is constantly learning more about the sheer complexity of the brain. It seems the proteins which make up each synapse combine to form different kinds of synapses, which, have been compared to computers, each synapse is like a computer, storing information and performing operations on that information.

All that is to say, we don’t understand how consciousness could emerge from the brain, because we don’t even know the brain, let alone its functioning, let alone how it functions or what it does.

1. You are trying to explain emergent behaviours with a reductionist approach. The two paradigms are incompatible.
2. You are trying to sprint (tackle complexity) when you can't even address simplicity: what is an "explanation"?

What does an "explanation" feel like? What does an "explanation" do?

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 1:50 pm Explain simply means, to make clear an unknown.

What it feels like, is...... “ahhhhhhh”.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:28 pm

Dimebag wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 1:50 pm Explain simply means, to make clear an unknown.

What it feels like, is...... “ahhhhhhh”.

So a bunch of symbols on a paper cause you to experience "ahhhhh"?

And you don't think that's the same kind of problem as "a bunch of neurons firing causing you to experience redness"?

Interesting.

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:24 pm What’s more interesting is that you seem to think that it must be explained how an experience emerges from the electrical activity of neurons.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 8:21 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:24 pm What’s more interesting is that you seem to think that it must be explained how an experience emerges from the electrical activity of neurons.

Well, yeah!!! I want it explained why some symbols on paper produce the experience of "aaaaah!!!!!" while others don't!

Explain "aaaaahness".

It's exactly the same request as explaining why some light produces "redness" and other light doesn't.

commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:03 pm As you know, redness was explained in my post. Why redness is produced by only one specific set of neurons was also explained. Aaaaahness and other light can be explained in the same fashion.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 10:01 pm

commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:03 pm As you know, redness was explained in my post. Why redness is produced by only one specific set of neurons was also explained. Aaaaahness and other light can be explained in the same fashion.

But "aaahness" was supposed to be the feeling of "redness explained".

So what do you propose we call the feeling of "aaahness explained" ?

commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 11:50 pm I do not agree that the feeling of redness explained is aaahness. I have nothing further to say about aaaahness. That is a matter for Skepdick and Dimebag.