Define Consciousness

[UncleAl]

Consciousness is the ability to feel sad. It is not a conscious entity unless it separates "I" from "not I," recognizes other sentience, and cares about it. Nature does not care, we do. That's consciousness. Responsive external action is trivially mimicked - an ICBM delivering its load with a small CEP. If you want consciousness, then it's Dark Star and Bomb #20.

Dark Star’s Darkest Hour – Carpenter / O’ Bannon « ΘυμαÏ�ι

"Sad" specifically. Happy people don't care, given the alternatives.

--
Uncle Al
UNDER SATAN'S LEFT FOOT
Vote a 10 for the experiments!

[Larv]

Consciousness is the human ability to reflect on an experience. As such, it is not an existential thing. Consciousness is not required to have an experience; it is required only to make sense of an experience. A mouse will have a cheese-eating experience in someone's kitchen, but it has no consciousness with which to analyze that experience. Whereas when a human has a mouse experience in her kitchen she will go out and buy a mousetrap, using her consciousness to make that decision.

[HydrogenBond]

Humans have two levels of consciousness. We have what animals have, which I will call the primary center of consciousness. This is based on the DNA. Humans also have a secondary center which allows us to become aware of the primary. An animal can feel sad because the owner went away. A human can also do this. But while the sadness is active, humans can step outside the feelings, as they occur, and begin to ponder why they feel sad. There are two things going on simultaneously in the human. The animal will only have the primary and feel sad, because they don't have the secondary.

The primary has a connection to the DNA since this is very natural. The secondary, on the other hand, allows free will, including choices that can willfully conflict with the primary connected to the DNA. I can willfully go on a hunger strike, which is not programmed into the primary by the DNA. An animal can't consciousness make this choice, in violation of the DNA's primary consciousness effect.

Relative to the chemical basis, the primary, to optimize the DNA, would need to be rooted in the most conservative brain matter. This seems to be the brain stem and center of the brain. The cerebral has more neuron connections, than we have genes, by many orders of magnitude. This opens the possibility of cerebral choices that are not fully designed in the DNA. This is the logical place to center the secondary. This allows the secondary to create entropy in the primary.

If we saw something in the environment, the signal goes to the primary or central brain to create first awareness. Any animal can do this. Once the awareness is centered in the cerebral, we have all types of options, even those that can make us react differently than nature. In the animal, cerebral extrapolation, by starting from center, is still centered in the DNA. The secondary, by being more centered in the cerebral can center itself apart from the primary.

Let me give an example, humans have the genes to be omnivores. It makes sense the primary is optimized this way, since the DNA has this capability. Using education, with the secondary centered in the cerebral, we can create entropy relative to the DNA and become a vegetarian. With will power, the secondary we can override the primary. I am not saying this is a bad choice, but this choice is centered in the cerebral mind based on philosophy.

The DNA extension of the primary, into the cerebral, would be expected to parallel the DNA. One will not find omnivore animals (in their DNA) willfully choosing one or the other in an all or not basis. Their DNA will extrapolate the primary, into the cerebral, so the cerebral uses the capacity of the DNA. There is no secondary to alter the cerebral with conscious choices that conflict the DNA.

For example

[modest]

Consciousness by the dictionary definition is to be aware of yourself and your situation. As a practical means of segregating lifeforms which have consciousness from those the don't I suggest:

Consciousness is the ability to look in a mirror and recognize oneself.

If you place a mirror with a hominid or dolphin and mark their body in an area they cannot see unaided they will examine the mark in the mirror. A cat or a dog won't do that. My dog, for example, recognizes that the mirror is a reflection. If I am behind my dog while she looks at me through the mirror and I hold up a treat she will turn around to get the treat. She understands that the object she wants is behind her. In the most primitive sense, she understands that it is a reflection. But, she does not recognize herself in the reflection. She would not pass mirror self-recognition tests. What seems to be lacking is self-recognition (an awareness of oneself / consciousness).

Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive convergence — PNAS

~modest

[Larv]

This my undocumented opinion, which is essentially ungoogleable:

Consciousness (of the human kind) is not an existential thing. It occupies no position in space or time; it reveals itself only in a cryptic manner. Consciousness is what a human mind makes of an experience. There are no metaphors for human consciousness, only vague references to mirror images and intelligent ghosts. Human consciousness can deduce the laws of gravity or turn a toasted-cheese sandwich into a vision of the Virgin Mary. As such, it is neither wise nor foolish. It is only what humans do with their experiences to try to make sense of them.

My best guess for the origin of human consciousness: the invention of symbolic language with syntax. Humans gained a new and useful perspective on their experiences when they learned how to record, analyze, and communicate them using a symbolic language with syntax. Prior to that humanoids could only do what bears and butterflies do: grunt and flutter around without any ability to “understand.”

(I will get assailed for this, but I’ll say it anyway) Julian Jaynes still offers me more to think about than any other author when I try to “understand” consciousness. Although in an important way I do see human consciousness differently than Jaynes does, I still think he’s on the right track. Jaynes differentiates human consciousness from bicamerality, which is a condition of the mind that hears voices from God and makes decisions based on His commands. This, according to Jaynes, is not too far from schizophrenia. I have to agree with this, because I regard religion as a disease of the mind, one that impairs the acuity of a fully functioning consciousness.

At the very least, however, I have to agree with Jaynes that human consciousness evolved on the back of a symbolic language with syntax. [I say “with syntax” because other animals have languages, too, ostensibly even symbolic ones. Primates have all kinds of vocal signals for serving survival, social, and reproductive needs. Insects, such as bees, have a dancing kind of language that communicates resource and logistical information. The difference between those “symbolic” languages and ours is the assembly of syntax. (e.g., “I love you” and “I hate you” are symbolic expressions that rely entirely on syntax for communication.)]

[HydrogenBond]

Consciousness is a function of awareness. The more levels of awareness one has, for a given situation, the more conscious we are. An animal will aware of a food object , so he is conscious. Humans are not only aware of that, they might also be aware of its nutritional value. This extra layer of consciousness is based on learning, memory, and language, which filters animal awareness broadening consciousness.

If we add the human ability for logic and argument, one can move the mind around within our static memory, and deduce additional level of awareness we may not have learned directly or is not in static memory. We see the food and know all its food value content. We might then examine it further, noting color, softness and smell and deduce it is not yet ripe to perfection.

As I leave the farm stand, I begin to wonder, why was I attracted to that particular fruit stand and not the other one, who had the same fruit? In either place, I could have had the same level of fruit awareness? I was not aware of this gravitation, until now.

The gravitation did not consciously filter through my conscious memory, which is why i was not aware. The unconscious may have been aware of preferences due to habits and routines and did its own filtering for me. In this case, my unconscious was like the animal, who is aware, without using a conscious filter.

Now I am aware of something, below my level of awareness. As it turned out during the multi-task, I was semi-conscious, thinking I was fully conscious. Now I am aware I was not fully aware.

[watcher]

the knowledge of an individuality is referred to by that knowing as self. self is expressed as I AM. i AM is consciousness. consciousness is therefore the knowing that one exists.

[modest]

Originally Posted by watcher

the knowledge of an individuality is referred to by that knowing as self. self is expressed as I AM. i AM is consciousness. consciousness is therefore the knowing that one exists.

A book has knowledge. By your definition, I'm pretty sure this book would have consciousness:

Amazon.com: I Am A Book (9780761329053): Linda...
Amazon.com: I Am A Book (9780761329053): Linda...

~modest

[watcher]

Originally Posted by modest

A book has knowledge. By your definition, I'm pretty sure this book would have consciousness:

Amazon.com: I Am A Book (9780761329053): Linda Hayward, Carol Nicklaus: Books

~modest

the book has information. all infos are known thru cosnciousness. knowledge of the book is thru your experience of the book. all experience are known thru consciousness. aamof, all that can be known is known thru consciousness.

[watcher]

Consciousness (of the human kind) is not an existential thing.

you probably mean consciousness as a non-physical thing. but consciousness is existential as an experience.

It occupies no position in space or time;

yes, non locality appeared to be one of its properties

it reveals itself only in a cryptic manner.

yes, it's cryptic. we can only know its properties.
consciousness is like space. it is a mysterious substance known only thru its properties.

consciousness is what a human mind makes of an experience.

all experience has an element of knowingness. one of the property of consciousness is its inherent ability to know.