Hmmmm....yeah. If it can’t be proven the one was pissed because he understood “3 more than me” as opposed to just recognizing “that sorry sack of elephant droppings has got my damn peanuts”.....then it cannot be said he was doing math. Even if we grant monkeys the capacity to recognize relative quantities, which isn’t that far-fetched, we haven’t explained that his anger is because of it. Maybe he’s just selfish. Or worried what his ol’ lady will say if he don’t bring home the......er.....peanuts. — Mww
And if everything in Nature uses math, and if the math everything in Nature uses isn’t the same as the math we use — Mww
A photo-receptor cell is 'conscious' of light. A cochlear hair cells is 'conscious' of sound...etc
— ovdtogt
What wayfarer said, plus.....(shudder) ......anthropomorphism: attributing congruence between being conscious of and being merely reactive to. — Mww
Seems pretty simple to me. If “redness” is the state of being red, “fitness” is the state of being fit, why shouldn’t consciousness be the state of being conscious?
A photo-receptor cell is 'conscious' of light. A cochlear hair cells is 'conscious' of sound...etc
So you put a camera and a tv to face each other. Tv produces light, camera receives it. Why would you say camera is “conscious” of that light rather than tv? — Zelebg
read up on studies into animal psychology. — ovdtogt
Yeah, I will. Just as soon as it is apparent to me, that the mental explanatory gap in an animal with 2B neural connections per mm3*, 16B in the most paradigmatically distinguishing section**, can be bridged by animals with 7B in his entire brain.
*Penrose, 1998
**Herculano-Houzel, 2009 — Mww
The TV is conscious of the signal it receives from the camera.
The camera is conscious of the light it receives from the TV.
That is the best way to figure out how a chimp 'thinks'. — ovdtogt
which is integration of the signal into something we can perhaps call qualia — Zelebg
You are talking about passively received signal/light in both cases. In that sense a stone is also conscious of light, is that what you wish to claim? — Zelebg
↪Mww
The human rational agent has but one thought at a time.
Therefore...? — Zelebg
we have absolutely no way to understand what we’re seeing about them, except by means of our own rational system. — Mww
You can call it anything you like. I call as I see it. The camera is conscious of light, the TV is conscious of the signal it receives from the camera. As simple as that.
The TV does not register light. The TV does not react to light.
So, what's the problem?. As far as I can tell, no one here is denying that humans have two ways of thinking about existence : sensory reality and mental ideality. Which category would you place Consciousness in : mental or physical --- or metaphysical?But nevertheless, we can still differentiate two distinct categories of existence — Zelebg
You equate "physical" and "actual", and I agree. But if a simulated electron is not physical & actual, what is it? Why do we call it "simulated"? If a "virtual" particle is not real, what is it? If an imaginary electron in a mind is not real, what is it? I call it "Ideal" : the idea of an electron. These are all conventional dictionary terms to describe those "distinct categories of existence".unable to understand the difference between physical existence of actual electron in the outside world,virtual existence of simulated electron in a computer, and mental existence of imagined electron in the brain. — Zelebg
Therefore it is non-contradictory to say consciousness is a state of being conscious.
didn't consider mathematics as abstract thought. I just googled the definition and used their interpretation as the basis for my argument.
I do consider mathematics as a kind of fundamental law of nature independent from human experience. — ovdtogt
You equate "physical" and "actual", and I agree. But if a simulated electron is not physical & actual, what is it?
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.