This post has been de-listed
It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.
The only person I currently know of that has a scientific theory of consciousness is Giulio Tononi (information integration), and that particular definition is not limited in any way to brains. Still, I do not think his definition holds any water since its not intrinsically physical (as in physics) and cannot even be computed for networks larger than a few dozen.
Why are you unconscious when you sleep or under anesthesia? You still have a brain. What does that mean?
"Everything we know, and continue to find out about reality is that our cognition, our consciousness, our ‘spirit’ or ‘soul,’ is contained in the brain: No conscious being has ever been encountered that does not have a brain, or something like it (an advanced supercomputer)."
Im sorry, but nobody knows what consciousness actually is scientifically, so its wrong to say that its only in a brain. Article does not get off to a very good start.
Subreddit
Post Details
- Posted
- 12 years ago
- Reddit URL
- View post on reddit.com
- External URL
- http://coffeeshopatheist...
my point is that presuming that a brain is required to be conscious is unscientific and not actually grounded in anything. Without a physical theory of consciousness, you cannot even measure it. There is no physical (as in physics) theory of what consciousness actually is (that I am aware of), and whatever form of it (if there are multiple forms) we seem to possess when awake is not contingent on us having a brain and having those neurons fire, since both of those things are clearly present when we are in an unconscious state. That is, we can be unconscious and yet have a brain with neurons that are firing. Is it related to how the neurons fire? perhaps...that's Tonini's theory of integrated information. But ironically we cant actually measure it for networks (of things that are not just neurons) more than a few dozen.
Furthermore, the OP's article sais that advanced super computers may be conscious. Ok, hmm. What about those advanced super computers makes them conscious? Because currently they run on a particular form of energy (electricity) withen a substrate of doped silicon and metal interconnects which bears no resemblance whatsoever to brains or neurons.
The OP's article started out by making some very strong claims that we know a whole hell of a lot more than we actually do. Or, please, tell me what consciousness is...perhaps im the last one to the party.
I can only presume that the OP's article is going off about how idiotic religious thinkers are, since I stopped reading it after the first paragraph. Without even realizing it perhaps, the author starts by asserting things that have absolutely no scientific basis. Very ironic.