/lit/ - Literature

>rationalists claim they explain consciousness

>let's explain consciousness but let's not actually talk about consciousness
seems pretty reddit to me

science is not welcome on this board. GAS ALL MATERIALISTS

>>9969373
>materialism
>scientific

>>9969371
Given that people can predict what you will do before it even enters your mind when hooked up to a brain scanner it's obvious that consciousness is an afterthought.

>>9969376
that exact experiment could be done with an automata with no differences at all

>>9969382
Which proves that consciousness is an inconsequential side effect, doesn't it?

>>9969376
I have heard a theory that basically goes like this: many different parts of the unconscious mind compete for access to the conscious mind. Once one part of the mind wins over, it inserts a thought into the conscious mind. The part that seems weird to me though, is that the conscious mind then perceives itself coming up with the idea. Why does that happen? Why don't thoughts just happen, without anybody feeling as if they are actively "thinking" them? Maybe you could you disable the part of someone's brain that causes them to take credit for their thoughts.

>>9969454
>The part that seems weird to me though, is that the conscious mind then perceives itself coming up with the idea.
Only when you're not paying attention. If you pay close attention, like in meditation, the thoughts bloop out of nowhere without you feeling like an author. They seem to think themselves and 'you' are observing, but without the you, just observance.

>>9969486
Also, when you suddenly realise commit to focussing on the next thought that will come it's like they get shy and you just sit there existing in thoughtless clear silence. It's pretty spooky but also great and some sort of a relief.

functionalism 4ever

>>9969454
Thoughts are just strings of ideas, words, images that your brain pieces together based on prior experience and pattern recognition. In this sense, they do "just happen".

>>9969360
I'm warming up to it.

I have suspicions that the structure of conscious inquiry is such that the mind cannot consider its own experiences as a part of a causal nexus. It's a kind of epistemological barrier. So maybe I actually take a mysterian view, which only manifest to us as the plausibility of epiphenomenalism.

>>9969374
Weird post my friend, the text component of your post contains two concepts which should be together, but your gay anime shit seems to be implying something else

>>9969376

Behavior is a small facet of Consciousness.

>>9969360
>Is epiphenomenalism the best theory of consciousness we have thus far?
Acknowledging the existence of consciousness causally affects physical events, so no.
A better question is whether materialists are confirmed p-zombies, and whether it's therefore ethical to torture and kill them.

>>9970714
Please elaborate.

>>9969376
Oh... so you browse reddit too?

>>9972065
>facts are for reddit

>>9970662
I'm sorry anon but occultism and bad metaphysics aren't considered scientific by many people

>STEMspergery
>valid
lmao
>>9969376
behavior is not consciousness