• nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    Er, that’s what I am saying however is that you can observe and measure consciousness.

    You seem to have a very exclusive definition of consciousness, which only serves to avoid the argument, really.

    I don’t, I am just going based on current findings.

    I am not sure why it’s hard to accept that some living things may not be conscious. Viruses propagate “mindlessly”, they’re neither living nor conscious.

    I also don’t understand why you think emergent properties are a hypothesis. Emergent properties of biological processes are fact, look at any cell of any major organ in the body. Why do we treat the brain differently? Because I think we get irrational.

    • kronisk @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Er, that’s what I am saying however is that you can observe and measure consciousness.

      Going with any definition of consciousness relevant to this discussion, say phenomenality and/or awareness, no.

      I am not sure why it’s hard to accept that some living things may not be conscious. Viruses propagate “mindlessly”, they’re neither living nor conscious.

      That’s not really the point - I don’t claim to know what entities possess consciousness. The point is that you don’t either.

      I also don’t understand why you think emergent properties are a hypothesis. Emergent properties of biological processes are fact

      Obviously I’m talking about Emergentism as it relates to consciousness, and the idea that consciousness is an emergent property is not a fact, no. And there are perfectly valid reasons - for example, the “explanatory gap” - why someone might find it unsatisfactory.