/lit/ - Literature

>>23277924
>But if we're in a world with something that does the job of strong emergence
Consciousness is when you begin to ask questions like "Who lives in those houses? Should we improve their living conditions?"

>>22583575
>The "I" can be directly observed to exist.
The houses on the pic, too. Who lives in them? Should we help their dwellers to improve their living conditions?

>You are confusing functional consciousness with phenomenal consciousness.
And you are persistently asking "What time is it on the sun right now, according to Greenwich Mean Time?"

>directly observed to exist. Since philosophical zombies don't have qualia
while the true problem is the neglect of the unobservable. You are blind to your own blindness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_syndrome

>>22543088
>No way to explain the existence of consciousness
Wrong take.
Consciousness is when you not experience the enabling conditions of the experience. The eye cannot see its own seeing, your brain cannot access its own neurons.
And when I say "Not experience", it means it does not register even as absence. Like hemi-neglect patients, ignoring the left side of their vision.
And when you cannot perceive absence, you assume completeness. Like flicker fusion threshold, turning too much frames into a smooth film.

Hence, heuristics. Whatever you experience as your mind, is cheap gimmicks to get data in the absence of access to it. Otherwise, you would have been stuck in an infinite recursion.
Hence, philosophy/introspection/intentionalism is by default a discipline that is constructionally unable to give answers to the question of consciousness. What you get instead, are signals of a query error. You ask "Do green ideas sleep furiously?" and dance around it for 2500 years, thinking there is some profound wisdom behind it.

You are a machine. A biorobot. Deal with it.

>>22485134
>No, minds are the only thing you can actually say exist
Or can you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotard%27s_syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depersonalization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemispatial_neglect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_syndrome

>In order for there to be perception there must be a perceiver.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exformation

Yet the mechanisms that enable the 'perceiver' do not register even as absence. Discussing a perceiver is like discussing about the people who live those houses on the pic.

>There is no reason to not refer to that perceiver as a mind
There is no reason to ignore the role of the ignorance.