X-Message-Number: 8003
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 21:26:28 -0800
From: Tim Freeman <>
Subject: Is consciousness real?

From:  (Thomas Donaldson)
>However I'm prepared to accept that my sense of consciousness IS real, in
>just the same way as something I see in a forest, while walking alone, 
>is real --- even if no one else ever sees it.

Two responses to that:

1. Your observation of the forest is likely to be much more accurate
than your observation of your own processes.  Human brains aren't set
up to introspect very well.  The results of that introspection might
be a delusional system that helps survival (probably by helping
planning) or that helps you get along with the guy next door who
shares the delusional system.  It doesn't have to be what is really
going on.  If you play with hypnosis a bit, it becomes very clear that
the easiest thing to get is self-delusion -- that is, subjective
experiences and beliefs that correspond to nothing real at all.
Judging by the variety of conflicting religious beliefs that are held
with certainty by their adherents, it appears that one can also get
the same thing by regular exposure to an idea while in an ordinary
frame of mind.

2. After the observation of the forest or whatever you want to call
"consciousness" have been made, there is the definitional problem of
singling out which components of the entire observation correspond to
the concept of "forest" or "consciousness" that you are trying to
communicate about.  Ideally one would like to choose definitions that
are useful for some purpose, although some people are closed-minded
and cannot choose.  (These people are essentially slaves to whatever
intentional or accidental process made the choice for them, and
talking to them about this sort of thing isn't worthwhile, just as
talking about religion or politics usually isn't worthwhile.)

>Again, when you say "neither is more than a part of an ongoing
>computation that is controlling some device that is interacting with
>the rest of the world", why is it that this system has a sense of
>continuity?

I don't have a sense of continuity; I'm not sure what you're talking
about.  Select some sensory input that's always there, such as your
breathing or some minor sensation in your scalp.  Try to keep that
sensory input within the scope of your attention for 10 minutes as you
go about your everyday business.  You will fail; one of the other
things in your environment will capture all of your attention, and you
will forget about whatever sensation you chose at the beginning of the
exercise.  Zen Buddhists practice this sort of exercise for decades,
and they still fail.  (They claim the exercise has beneficial side
effects, not that it can be mastered.)  If you had continuity of
attention, this wouldn't happen.

Now I'll admit I have continuity of long-term memory.  This isn't very
significant.  The notebook I keep at work has continuity of long-term
memory too, and it's dead.  In fact, the notebook has continuity of
long-term memory better than I do.  That's why I write notes in it.

Now, if I put my computer in an infinite loop and leave it on over
night and there isn't a power failure, then it will be in the same
infinite loop in the morning.  That's continuity of attention for you.
If continuity of attention is important to you, then radical
self-reengineering is what you want, once it becomes feasible.

So what do you mean by a sense of continuity?  It *might* be one of
those delusional belief you can easily get with self-hypnosis or
decades of indoctrination.  Some people have a sense that God is
watching over them, and you have a sense of continuity.  Could be the
same sort of thing.
-- 
Tim Freeman       
            http://www.infoscreen.com/resume.html
Web-centered Java and Perl programming in Silicon Valley or offsite

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=8003