The hard problem of consciousness.

[Win]

Why do philosophical naturalists assume that the brain is the source of consciousness when there isn't any causal link between the two? Why is it that all other fields of science accept that correlation=/= causation but the same is not applied when it comes to consciousness and brain activity?

Well some would say that brain is the cause because when the brain gets damaged certain aspects of the mind like memory or intelligence start to decrease substantially. This observation is valid but it doesn't mean that the brain is the cause of consciousness and the mind.

What I propose is that we look at consciousness in this model:

The white light is consciousness and the prism is the prism is the factor through which it can express itself. The brain is like the prism and consciousness is like the white light. This I say is a very accurate description of what we are witnessing.

I say it's probably the only way we can properly explain this phenomenon. There is another view that considers everything as conscious but that one is too deep to get into.

Those two explanations actually fit well with the explanation Islam gives. Consciousness is the ruh that is breathed into us. It is not caused by the brain and just like the white light, it comes from a different source.

Ask if you need more explaining.

 

[486th President]

I always thought consciousness should basically be our soul it literally makes sense in every way to me

 

[Win]

@Revolutionary see how many replies this thread gets compared to my other gender thread.

.

 

[Hassan2000]

Athiests cant explain that one

 

[Win]

Athiests cant explain that one

Ahh this refreshing. You're acquainted with this argument?

 

[QueenofKings]

View attachment 165797

The white light is consciousness and the prism is the prism is the factor through which it can express itself.


Ask if you need more explaining.

what does the refracted rainbow represent in this example

 

[Win]

what does the refracted rainbow represent in this example

The expression of our consciousness. Basically the ability to consciously interact with the world.

The white light represents the consciousness whose source is from somewhere outside our body.

The prism is associated with the brain because it helps express conscious activity just like the prism helps with the refraction of light.

The refracted light is now the expression of our conscious states.

Thank you for asking the question.

 

[Hassan2000]

Ahh this refreshing. You're acquainted with this argument?

Yeah

 

[Revolutionary]

@Revolutionary see how many replies this thread gets compared to my other gender thread.

.

Very telling on a lot of the member's priorities here

 

[Boogie]

Interesting

 

[Shimbiris]

There's a lot to what makes us tick even on a biological level. The brain, hormones, our gut microbiome, all the outside stimuli. The list is too numerous to go into which is partly why I'm not convinced they'll ever create something truly approximating human consciousness with AI. To really be conscious the way Humans are it would need to be alive the way Humans are in almost every single minute, cellular detail and that seems too much to simulate or even scan for current tech.

 

[QueenofKings]

The expression of our consciousness. Basically the ability to consciously interact with the world.

The white light represents the consciousness whose source is from somewhere outside our body.

The prism is associated with the brain because it helps express conscious activity just like the prism helps with the refraction of light.

The refracted light is now the expression of our conscious states.

Thank you for asking the question.

I see, I think that’s an interesting, seems logical to me.
What are the offered explanations for where the consciousness stems from?

Evolutionary biology has mostly struggled to answer this. If I remember my lectures well is said consciousness = attention + awareness. I never understood the rational for how we developed awareness based on this theory. But attention was simply neurones competing and the brain processing only a select few.

 

[The alchemist]

I would say we know consciousness through our being, we live it and are fine-tuned in certain aspects (some more than others within a fixed parameter), to explain it probably requires measures outside the scope of what we traditionally consider 'knowledge' and the various instrumental framework to infer with. I can guess what consciousness is, yet, it's not provable by science, in fact, it could be far outside our dimensional capacity, not even through the bandwidth of abstract conceptual reach.

 

[Win]

I would say we know consciousness through our being, we live it and are fine-tuned in certain aspects (some more than others within a fixed parameter), to explain it probably requires measures outside the scope of what we traditionally consider 'knowledge' and the various instrumental framework to infer with. I can guess what consciousness is, yet, it's not provable by science, in fact, it could be far outside our dimensional capacity, not even through the bandwidth of abstract conceptual reach.

You get it.

You'de be surprised by how many scientists actually believe that science will inevitably prove it. I call it the science of the gaps fallacy.

We can't use the scientific method to describe, observe and experiment on consciousness itself. They can only observe the correlation like brain activity.

This ironically proves the existence of Allah because something can't give rise to something else if it doesn't already contain the thing itself or the ability to contain it.

Consciousness can't come from a blind and mindless process such as evolution because evolution itself doesn't contain consciousness. Only something conscious can give rise to conscious beings.

 

[Win]

There's a lot to what makes us tick even on a biological level. The brain, hormones, our gut microbiome, all the outside stimuli. The list is too numerous to go into which is partly why I'm not convinced they'll ever create something truly approximating human consciousness with AI. To really be conscious the way Humans are it would need to be alive the way Humans are in almost every single minute, cellular detail and that seems too much to simulate or even scan for current tech.

Your understanding about this somewhat wrong since you correlate the brain with consciousness. Consciousness and the brain are different. You could call our consciousness our soul.

Even if they recreated every little detail, they woupdn't be able to get consciousness solely because consciousness is not caused by the brain. There might be some scientists that believe that the brain is the cause(with no proof) because it fits right into their naturalistic outlook. Everything that can't be observed or experimented on basically anything that can't be explained by science is somehow non-existent. They refuse to believe it because it will lead to even more questions which will give light to the conclusion that a conscious being who can't be explained by science(due to its limited scope) has given rise to us conscious beings.


So in conclusion, AI will never be alive. It will always be a machine no matter how complex they make it.

 

[Win]

What are the offered explanations for where the consciousness stems from?

Well, there are a lot of offered explanations. There are some that believe that consciousness doesn't exist and that it is an illusion. This mainly offered by philosophical naturalists who are mostly atheists.

There is another group that says that everything is conscious and there is another group that say that the origin of our consciousness could only have come from a conscious being. These 2 last points fit well with what Islam teaches.

Evolutionary biology has mostly struggled to answer this. If I remember my lectures well is said consciousness = attention + awareness. I never understood the rational for how we developed awareness based on this theory. But attention was simply neurones competing and the brain processing only a select few.

You see, in other fields of science, it is known that correlation=/= causation but when it comes to consciousness then they brush that principal away and claim that the correlation is actually causation without giving proof. They basically do this:

Most uni books tend to teach indoctrination rather than truth. I suggest you go to actual neuroscientists and see what they have to say in this issue.

Check out this thread on Twitter and a video explaining how consciousness doesn't arise from the brain by a leading neuroscientist.



Also check out this video by a great scientist who explains how the origin of life theory foesn't explain our origins as told to us by scientists.

 

[Omar del Sur]

"philosophical naturalists" are not naturalists. their ideology is not natural. it's like fox saying they're fair and balanced. propagandistic use of language. their ideology is abnormal and unnatural but they call themselves "naturalists". loaded language.

 

[المهندس]

Your understanding about this somewhat wrong since you correlate the brain with consciousness. Consciousness and the brain are different. You could call our consciousness our soul.

Even if they recreated every little detail, they woupdn't be able to get consciousness solely because consciousness is not caused by the brain. There might be some scientists that believe that the brain is the cause(with no proof) because it fits right into their naturalistic outlook. Everything that can't be observed or experimented on basically anything that can't be explained by science is somehow non-existent. They refuse to believe it because it will lead to even more questions which will give light to the conclusion that a conscious being who can't be explained by science(due to its limited scope) has given rise to us conscious beings.


So in conclusion, AI will never be alive. It will always be a machine no matter how complex they make it.

It makes me laugh when people actually believe these secular kuffar could mimic the complexity of the human body, their theories on the human body are constantly changing.

Al is nonsense and it would never surpass what it is which is a bunch of algorithms which rely on human maintenance and interaction.