Based on everything we know, it's a reasonable a justifiable assumption that amoeba can't have experience. I can't make assumptions on what I don't know. — Unseen
So, if you have a point, make it again briefly and in plain language. Remember that Einstein once said "If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself." — Unseen
For me, to be conscious is to be having experiences, and they are given to me by my pre-conscious mind. My brain. The only "contact" is the passive one in which the brain offers up an experience. In the case of conscious actions, the brain gives me the impression of both initiation and follow through. — Unseen
Based on a definition of experience as ‘an event or occurrence which leaves an impression on someone’, it’s a reasonable and justifiable assumption that amoeba CAN have experiences... — Possibility
So what is it that prevents you from recognising response to stimuli as experience? — Possibility
It's one thing to say your belief that some creatures are not conscious is a reasonable assumption (debatable but not particularly controversial) but quite another to say you know it with certainty as you did earlier:Based on everything we know, it's a reasonable a justifiable assumption that amoeba can't have experience. — Unseen
I know it with about the same certainty as I know that I'm not writing from the surface of the moon. — Unseen
↪Unseen
You might enjoy this lecture by Peter Watts on the exact question you proposed.
The TL:DW is "No one knows, maybe consciousness is a parasite?, anyway it's a really good lecture and I highly recommend watching it entirety (don't be discouraged by the low amount of views) — FreeEnergy
Do you think it's possible you are actually on the surface of the Moon? — Unseen
I just think that the evidence for any belief that "Some of the most successful creatures on the planet, in terms of survival, are not conscious." i — ChrisH
What is the criterion for consciousness such that when it is met by any and all candidates, those candidates and only those candidates are the ones sensibly said to have consciousness whereas any and all candidates that do not meet the criterion are likewise sensibly denied to have consciousness? — creativesoul
Stimulus/response is inadequate. Experience takes more than that. The definition you've invoked references impressions on humans. — creativesoul
Why are we conscious? — Unseen
What is the criterion for consciousness such that when it is met by any and all candidates, those candidates and only those candidates are the ones sensibly said to have consciousness whereas any and all candidates that do not meet the criterion are likewise sensibly denied to have consciousness?
— creativesoul
This is where the problem has been in this, and continues to be in many discussions about consciousness. The OP defined consciousness as ‘having experiences’, yet the impression I got from the discussion was that ‘being aware of having experiences’ was what they meant. I only wanted to clear up the confusion.
If ‘consciousness’ is defined as ‘having experiences’, then I would argue that all living entities may be considered conscious. If, however, consciousness was defined as ‘being aware of having experiences’, then only those animals that exhibit self-awareness would be considered ‘conscious’. — Possibility
Stimulus/response is inadequate. Experience takes more than that. The definition you've invoked references impressions on humans.
— creativesoul
I agree on both counts. The term ‘someone’ implies human only, but doesn’t state it explicitly enough to rule out non-humans, in my opinion. — Possibility
The definition was quoted from the Oxford dictionary, and invoked to try and clear up the confusion I described above.
Personally, I don’t see consciousness as defined by a set of criterion or a line below which nothing is conscious. To me, consciousness describes a gradual development in the way that matter integrates information.
Didn't you say we were created modeled after Him? — Unseen
An event that leaves an impression on someone needs to be parsed in terms of what such an impression consists of and what those things are themselves existentially dependent upon.
Some impressions are left in a fluent listener by hurtful language use of a fluent speaker. Those impressions are existentially dependent upon language use. Such experience cannot be had by a language less creature, let alone an amoeba. — creativesoul
I say that - at a bare minimum - all experience takes a creature to whom the experience is meaningful. In short, all experience consists of and/or requires thought/belief about what's happening. — creativesoul
I readily agree that experience comes in 'degrees'(for lack of a better description). — creativesoul
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.