What is the use of consciousness?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bahman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Free will is contrary to being programmed.
We have no free will. Our action is solely the result of how we are programed. We act rationally in any situation depending on how we are programed. I have a separate thread for free will.
 
How learning is tight to consciousness?
How did the first hominids learned to build the first tools? First they had to be aware of their environment and their role in that environment (which couldn’t have happened if they wouldn’t have had a sense of identity- as being separate from others). Than they actually needed to realize that using certain tools makes hunting more efficient (couldn’t have done it without first observing others do it, observing that they are successful and that might be a good idea to follow their example).
Than it is the fact that they actually has to learn how to make those tools. Yes, the first hominids just used rocks or tree branches, but as those tools became more complex, they needed to learn to build them. One or a few of them had to learn others to build those tools. Obviously, those had to carefully observe in order to learn how this tools are made.

Now, how could hominids do any of this if they lacked consciousness?
 
You need to explain that how intentionality can manifest itself into an action.
Am I intending to type this post or am I a mindless machine whose sense of self is entirely an illusion and my chemical reactions are just responding to these photons carrying images of scribbles that in reality don’t point beyond themselves to any meaning nor have any meaning inherently?
 
I don’t see how your argument can explain any use for consciousness. We learn things and act based on what we have learned.
Like the scientist who only sees the quantitative and not the qualitative you are missing more than you are seeing.
 
All our emotions are the result of releasing some hormones inside our blood stream. This leads to a specific functioning plus experiencing a specific emotion which there is no use for emotion if we accept the fact that each hormone has its own functioning.
Love is more than an emotion. It involves free will and intention to will the good of the beloved. You can not love unconsciously. Really, would you prefer an unconscious lover or a person you could talk with and have a relationship with? Likewise God wanted to have a relationship with us.
 
How did the first hominids learned to build the first tools? First they had to be aware of their environment and their role in that environment (which couldn’t have happened if they wouldn’t have had a sense of identity- as being separate from others). Than they actually needed to realize that using certain tools makes hunting more efficient (couldn’t have done it without first observing others do it, observing that they are successful and that might be a good idea to follow their example).
Than it is the fact that they actually has to learn how to make those tools. Yes, the first hominids just used rocks or tree branches, but as those tools became more complex, they needed to learn to build them. One or a few of them had to learn others to build those tools. Obviously, those had to carefully observe in order to learn how this tools are made.

Now, how could hominids do any of this if they lacked consciousness?
Your example is good but it didn’t explain why experience is needed. I know and you know that experience happens during learning but we could not explain how we learn a new thing when we experience. In simple word, the act of learning a new thing is related a new wiring inside our brain. This rewiring can be done by taking information from outside and process the gathered information in order to reach a new wiring which is related by learning a new thing. So we are at the first step: what is the use of consciousness?
 
Am I intending to type this post or am I a mindless machine whose sense of self is entirely an illusion and my chemical reactions are just responding to these photons carrying images of scribbles that in reality don’t point beyond themselves to any meaning nor have any meaning inherently?
You first need to understand my argument. My argument is either new to you or it is not. You might know the answer if my argument is not new to you. Information is stored inside our brains by wiring and we can have access to it by introspection. You need to process the information you have in order to find an answer if you don’t know the answer. This process is done with rewiring. So everything is done inside the brain. The problem which is left is that what is the use of experience.
 
There are no “wires” in the brain. Information is not “stored” there. You are talking about something more complex than the totality of relationships among the stars in the universe. Any analogy will fail. You are trying to sort out consciousness in terms of these very limited concepts. Of course it will make no sense to you.

Consider that the brain constitutes our physical presence in the universe. We relate to that universe of which we are a part. One way to understand consciousness is as the mental expression of that relationship. If the train I am on derails and I am thrown head first into the ceiling, there is likely going to be sufficient damage to make me lose consciousness. I will not be dead, so I will be just lying in a jumble of metal making a bigger mess. There will not be any consciousness because nothing is going on perceptually, cognitively, or emotionally. The nociceptors reacting to tissue damage will be blasting my hopefully intact spinal cord with pain messages, but where I form memories, classify and give meaning to perceptions everything will be a swollen, congested mess of chaotic neural activity. This isn’t so much silence as unintelligibility.

If everything is working right, there is consciousness. I am me and that is how I roll. A rock just sits there and is itself with its simple physical being. What is happening here as we dialogue is a lot more complex.

If we limit our scope and understand consciousness as being the personal experience of existence, your question boils down to: What is the purpose of existence? And, what is the purpose of human existence? I believe these have been answered. What exactly do you want to hear?
 
Your example is good but it didn’t explain why experience is needed. I know and you know that experience happens during learning but we could not explain how we learn a new thing when we experience. In simple word, the act of learning a new thing is related a new wiring inside our brain. This rewiring can be done by taking information from outside and process the gathered information in order to reach a new wiring which is related by learning a new thing. So we are at the first step: what is the use of consciousness?
Evolutionary we needed consciousness to make sense of our environment, to have a sense of self-identity (as different from others and other elements), be aware of the changes/dangers/opportunities around us, etc. Otherwise there would be no point in ever learning a new information. If we would be in a state similar with dreaming or coma, what will be the point in learning something new? How would this allow us to survive and " conquer " our environment.

I am not really an expert in how the brains work, and to be fair even the experts don’t know all the answers yet. But it is pretty clear that new information create a new wiring, this doesn’t mean you are able to do in practice certain activities without first having to actually experience them. Put it this way- if you read a book about skiing, but never actually went skiing, are you going to perfectly put it in practice? From practice, I can tell you that you can’t learn a new language just by studying it- you must also practice it. And many other examples- the information is there, so a new wiring is realized but you also need the experience.
 
Evolutionary we needed consciousness to make sense of our environment, to have a sense of self-identity (as different from others and other elements), be aware of the changes/dangers/opportunities around us, etc. Otherwise there would be no point in ever learning a new information. If we would be in a state similar with dreaming or coma, what will be the point in learning something new? How would this allow us to survive and " conquer " our environment. I am not really an expert in how the brains work, and to be fair even the experts don’t know all the answers yet. But it is pretty clear that new information create a new wiring, this doesn’t mean you are able to do in practice certain activities without first having to actually experience them. Put it this way- if you read a book about skiing, but never actually went skiing, are you going to perfectly put it in practice? From practice, I can tell you that you can’t learn a new language just by studying it- you must also practice it. And many other examples- the information is there, so a new wiring is realized but you also need the experience.
I see no reason to suppose that one-celled creatures are not conscious of their environment. The fact that they react suggests they are.

Self-identity is an interesting quite complex subject.
There are indications that some animals have this capacity albeit in primitive form.
Clearly it would be nothing like the stories we carry about within ourselves about our lives and who we are.
In this regard, the difference between mankind and the most advanced in the animal kingdom is quite remarkable.

What answers do you think experts don’t know yet?
What makes you believe they are knowable?

New information does not necessarily create “new wiring”.
While practicing something is definitely a way to make new and more connections between neurons, probably more important would be intra- and intercellular changes involving neurotransmitters, receptors etc., along with some in the supporting matter of the brain all of which alters the communication between neurons.
All of this constitutes the contents of consciousness as it relates to what is going on within the body of the person.

Consciousness does not arise from the brain, but rather includes CNS functioning as a component of our being which is relational in nature.
Focussing on this particular moment as an example, knowing occurs as a finite experience, separate from but connecting with what is other.
If we go along with what everyone does and call this being “I”, I can say that I know that I am typing, reading etc giving meaning through the organization of perceptions and concepts into the whole that is the moment.
These words are on the screen, in my brain as fluctuating neural patterns, and outside of space and time as meaning.

The point in asking vague questions like the OP, containing words whose meanings are not agreed upon, is that it makes for lively, altho’ perhaps not useful, discussion.
 
There are no “wires” in the brain. Information is not “stored” there. You are talking about something more complex than the totality of relationships among the stars in the universe. Any analogy will fail. You are trying to sort out consciousness in terms of these very limited concepts. Of course it will make no sense to you.

Consider that the brain constitutes our physical presence in the universe. We relate to that universe of which we are a part. One way to understand consciousness is as the mental expression of that relationship. If the train I am on derails and I am thrown head first into the ceiling, there is likely going to be sufficient damage to make me lose consciousness. I will not be dead, so I will be just lying in a jumble of metal making a bigger mess. There will not be any consciousness because nothing is going on perceptually, cognitively, or emotionally. The nociceptors reacting to tissue damage will be blasting my hopefully intact spinal cord with pain messages, but where I form memories, classify and give meaning to perceptions everything will be a swollen, congested mess of chaotic neural activity. This isn’t so much silence as unintelligibility.

If everything is working right, there is consciousness. I am me and that is how I roll. A rock just sits there and is itself with its simple physical being. What is happening here as we dialogue is a lot more complex.

If we limit our scope and understand consciousness as being the personal experience of existence, your question boils down to: What is the purpose of existence? And, what is the purpose of human existence? I believe these have been answered. What exactly do you want to hear?
There is wiring inside our brains.
Information is kept inside our brain. Where else it could be?
 
Evolutionary we needed consciousness to make sense of our environment, to have a sense of self-identity (as different from others and other elements), be aware of the changes/dangers/opportunities around us, etc. Otherwise there would be no point in ever learning a new information. If we would be in a state similar with dreaming or coma, what will be the point in learning something new? How would this allow us to survive and " conquer " our environment.

I am not really an expert in how the brains work, and to be fair even the experts don’t know all the answers yet. But it is pretty clear that new information create a new wiring, this doesn’t mean you are able to do in practice certain activities without first having to actually experience them. Put it this way- if you read a book about skiing, but never actually went skiing, are you going to perfectly put it in practice? From practice, I can tell you that you can’t learn a new language just by studying it- you must also practice it. And many other examples- the information is there, so a new wiring is realized but you also need the experience.
Lets put facts together: (1) We know that the information, what we learn, is hold inside the brain as wiring, (2) we know that learning is a rewiring process, (3) we don’t directly have control over rewiring, it is automatic and 4) we experience.

From (1), (2) and (3) we can deduce that there is no need for consciousness/experience in order to learn and preserve information.
 
Yes, of course consciousness doesn’t exist only in humans, but in different degrees in most of the animal world. And yes, there is no doubt that some animals have a sense of self-identity- I guess the most obvious example are the Apes- with their quite large communities and complex social structures- it is clear they have the self-identity capacity (the same capacity exists in other animals as well, but we don’t really know in what degree because 1) we can only observe their behavior- they can’t tell us about themselves and 2) a tendency to see and “judge” other animals capacities and abilities through human lens).

Because while neuroscience had made great progress, there are still some questions for which we don’t have a definitive answer (although we had theories). For example, why do some information doesn’t change the behavior even with some practice and intention? For example with all the information and social skills training, some people are still not doing a great job in social situations.
 
Lets put facts together: (1) We know that the information, what we learn, is hold inside the brain as wiring, (2) we know that learning is a rewiring process, (3) we don’t directly have control over rewiring, it is automatic and 4) we experience.

From (1), (2) and (3) we can deduce that there is no need for consciousness/experience in order to learn and preserve information.
As I said, not an expert in how the brain works, but just because we don’t have direct control over how exactly something is done, doesn’t mean it is done automatically. I don’t have direct access over the memorization, yet it takes effort and intent to memorize what I need.
It is pretty obvious in many cases that we need experience to put what we’ve learn to an actual use. Why exactly is this you might be more able to tell me (I’ve said I am not an expert in neuroscience)- does the practice and experience " strengthen" neuronal pathway or is more about motor learning for physical activities?

PS: you know that is a circular argument. If you aren’t conscious, what is the need or point in learning new information. And how would I learn it anyway? If I would have grown all alone on an island, do you think I would learn social skills? Or even a language? To begin with, in that situation there would be no need for my survival to learn any of this and anyway, I would need someone from whom to learn it.
 
As I said, not an expert in how the brain works, but just because we don’t have direct control over how exactly something is done, doesn’t mean it is done automatically. I don’t have direct access over the memorization, yet it takes effort and intent to memorize what I need.
It is pretty obvious in many cases that we need experience to put what we’ve learn to an actual use. Why exactly is this you might be more able to tell me (I’ve said I am not an expert in neuroscience)- does the practice and experience " strengthen" neuronal pathway or is more about motor learning for physical activities?

PS: you know that is a circular argument. If you aren’t conscious, what is the need or point in learning new information. And how would I learn it anyway? If I would have grown all alone on an island, do you think I would learn social skills? Or even a language? To begin with, in that situation there would be no need for my survival to learn any of this and anyway, I would need someone from whom to learn it.
So perhaps the low level process, rewiring, is linked to high level process, conscious act, in a systematic way.
 
There is wiring inside our brains.
Information is kept inside our brain. Where else it could be?
It is like saying there is wiring in the geopolitical system that governs human activity on earth.
You are correct in only the most concrete way.
That this is how some understand the reality of the person is very sad to read coming from people who can do much better.

The analogy to a computer is a way to simplify things for “regular folk” in undergrad courses and on the Internet, like talking about chemical imbalances in the field of mental health. I’m not trying to be condescending, It is just that the explanation is so very limited.
And, there is a problem when juggling these analogies, trying to make them fit. They don’t.

You search for a word that is on the tip of your tongue.
Who is searching? How do you know the word exists?
If you don’t have a particular part of the brain intact, there will be no word appearing. So where and what was the word? In the chemistry? The neuron? The “wiring”?

I provide you with an explanation above. But, you want something that fits your world view. You must expand it. It will do so if you seek what you do not know rather than try to get it all to fit in your current way of understanding.
 
If we draw an analogy between the microcosm of the person and the macrocosm of human activity on earth, we will quickly observe that there is more going on than simply communication networks. It would be bizarre to think that such physical entities as copper and optical wiring, microwave towers and satellites was all there is to it. The activity is governed by human will and desire as people come together, united or in opposition, within different populations holding to different traditions and beliefs, in different areas of the globe where they manage with the physical realities of their particular climates, resources, topography etc. The view that it boils down to the establishment of a phone line, or a new neuronal connection, reduces human activity as it manifests itself within this disparate humanity or within the individual, to what is by itself a meaningless and empty structure. It totally misses the big, the intermediate and small picture, focussing on what is necessary but essentially trivial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top