[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 58 KB, 559x299, thinking-gorilla-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7324598 No.7324598 [Reply] [Original]

To what extent can an animal have consciousness?

>> No.7324619

A lesser extent, perhaps. Let's say a monkey is less conscious, whatever that means. A dog less still. A mouse less still. An ant less still. A worm less still. A plant less still. A microbe less still. An atom less still. A subatomic particle less still.

Consciousness appears to be a spectrum. It's a function of how much information a system is able to process, and is a basic property of everything.

>> No.7324621

how many neurons is necessary of consciousness?

>> No.7324622

>>7324619
>A plant less still. A microbe less still. An atom less still. A subatomic particle less still.

but without a brain there isn't consciousness

unless you're saying that biological properties = conciousness

>> No.7324657

It seems easy to imagine what a lesser consciousness would be. What would it mean for something to be more conscious than a human?

>> No.7324658

>>7324622
This is something that has always "troubled" me.
How can things that have no consciousness live and do stuff?
Humans have reasons to do stuff, have an understanding of what they want, call it illusions if you must, but they still are a reason to move forward. Animals I think just act on instinct and want to live but have no reason to live, not like they care anyway, but they still have a degree of consciousness.
But things like parasites, insects, viruses, those things don't even have brains, they are not aware of their own existence, why then do they live and keep living? Obviously they don't care about "muh meaning" or shit like that, but they are like nothing, parts of the universe that don't have awareness, why do they do things then? Why do they try so hard to live?

>> No.7324665

>>7324657
Are we not the epitome of consciousness? How does a species become "more" conscious than what we currently are and what does that entail?

>> No.7324676

>>7324658
Well, for example, when white blood cells attack a virus in you body, their has to be something in their brain/nucleus that processes enemies right? Is that quality just like, inherent in them? How can they attack viruses without thinking and processing it to some degree? And if they aren't thinking, what are they doing? They HAVE to be going through some type of process where they are able to perceive and distinguish a virus in order to attack.

>> No.7324696

>>7324676
Well they are parts of a bigger something and they are programmed by that bigger something, they have a specific function and coexist with the rest of the cells inside that bigger something.
But things like fleas, they just keep on existing for no reason, just for the sake of existing, totally unthinking, but why? What drives them?
And going deeper into this, why do cells act the way they do? They come per-progammed, yes, but why? Why is life like this?

>> No.7324739

>>7324658

>But things like parasites, insects, viruses, those things don't even have brains, they are not aware of their own existence, why then do they live and keep living?

Awareness is not an integral part of it. When configurations of matter arise that are good at persisting and replicating, they do so as much as possible as is their nature. With the passage of time such arrangements can become more complex and refined through selectional pressures to fill certain niches or whatever. But again, not because they -want- to, but because it is a natural consequence that things that replicate replicate and will continue to do so because their makeup, their chemistry, determines that they will do so. If a molecule which reacts in such a way that it replicates itself randomly comes into being, as long as conditions are right, it will continue doing so, because that's what that configuration of matter does.

>> No.7324744

Science is not a thing of why, that implies a deeper meaning, to the people in this thread think how is something cause or what causes it.

>> No.7324745

>>7324598
Homo sapiens is purported to have a pretty high level of it.

>> No.7324757

>>7324744
I think an answer of "they're like clockwork automatons" would be satisfactory to them

>> No.7324765

>>7324665
we have no idea how conscious other beings are. considering how little of our neural activity we are aware of, it is entirely possible that an animal of lesser cranial power would have greater awareness than us. we are only conscious of things we want to communicate with other beings, it might be beneficial for a solitary creature to be aware of all mental activity

>> No.7324813

>>7324696
darwinism and the development of the nucleus

>> No.7324868

Anyone who has spent more than five seconds alone with an animal would be aware that they are conscious. There is no magic spark to humans; it's a matter of degree not difference.

If animals are automatons, then so are humans. There is plenty of observational data showing that our aware sentience is just along for the ride.

>> No.7325590

>>7324765
could you image in we ourselves were conscious of everything our cells/organs did

Like any of us could sense before it even happened.

2spooky

>> No.7325594

>>7325590
Woops, meant any of us could sense cancer*

>> No.7326618

>>7324658
here's what I want to know

if the brain is just a complicated circuit, then where does consciousness come from?

A simple circuit like a light bulb, switch, and battery don't create feelings. So why does a brain? Isn't it the same thing only more complicated? At what point can we say this is where feelings and perceptions are formed?

All of it is just mechanical shit. Like dominos being knocked over. How does awareness come out of that? If you program a video game character to act a certain way it will, that doesn't mean it's actually feeling that way.

Where does awareness and feeling come from? Science hasn't answered this yet as far as I know

>> No.7326627

>>7326618
hormones

>> No.7326634

>>7324658
> why do they do things then

In this case the why is the how. They do these things because it is the only actions they can take.

A virus has no more control infecting a cell than a rock has control over falling.

>> No.7326641

>>7326627
that just plays into the mechanics. Once again like dominos. How do no physical things like perceptions come from that?

We should just be automatons. Like a car made from a mouse trap. How do chemical/mechanical reactions create non physical things like feelings and perception?

>> No.7326653

>>7324658
Simple behavior and physiological mechanisms are hardwired into the genetic information, they are carried out automatically, so you don't need a brain to pull them off. The genetic code has a storage limit, of course, so the more complex the behavior is the more developed the nervous system will have to be, so that behavior can be learnt and become "stored' in the brain

>> No.7326668
File: 296 KB, 640x405, brazilian scientists research cure for laziness.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7326668

>>7324598
The apes we've taught sign language to communicated at about the level of a three year old human. They could indicate if they wanted something or they could answer simple questions about how they were doing but no ape has ever once asked a question of any researcher.

This could indicate that they have no sense or understanding that others around them are thinking, living organisms like themselves. They never once assume that that person they're communicating with could inform them of something they don't know. Humans develop this sense at about the age of four.

Also, I know you are talking about non-human animals but humans are animals too and our level of consciousness is determined by our biology like apes and everything else. Technically humans are the most 'conscious' animal on Earth. But there's no reason to think the scale only goes up to us. It's more than possible that we're several rungs lower on the intelligence scale when compared to extra-terrestrials.

tl;dr consciousness probably exists on a gradient scale

>> No.7326683

>>7324676
What, like a computer does? Does that make my laptop conscious?

>> No.7326692

>>7326634
Then can we really say that they are alive? Are they not more like entities or some shit than living beings?

>>7326653
But were did these mechanisms came from and for what purpose? Does life just reproduces and goes on because why not?

>> No.7326696

>>7326683
The programs on your computer aren't alive.

>> No.7326703

>>7326692
Life has a definition beyond conciousness though.

>> No.7326711

>>7326703
Oh right, I got a bit carried away.

>> No.7327120

>>7326641
hormones/chemicals in the brain determine our emotions

>> No.7327257 [DELETED] 

>>7324657
>what is instinct

>> No.7327258

>>7324658
>what is instinct

>> No.7327289

>>7326692
>But were did these mechanisms came from and for what purpose?
Evolution via mutation and selection.
>Does life just reproduces and goes on because why not?
Yeah, that's correct, at least for forms with a poorly developed nervous system; it's up to you to decide whether you are just a biological machine or not.

>> No.7327296

Just let me say one word to you, just one word. One word:

Memory.

>> No.7327307

>>7327296
wut

>> No.7327322

>>7327296
What does that have to do with it? Many animals are proven to have extensive memory. Also watch Coco the gorilla videos and tell me that fucker isn't conscious and has feelings beyond the basic reptilian urges.

Killer whales also have a much more developed pre frontal cortex than humans and have developed individual dialects between pods. Fucking mindblowing because the PFC is believed to be where its at for emotions and complex thought processing. Would not be suprised if they are conscious the way we are

I really think we will start seeing more and more work on this and come to a realisation that we were wrong all along, animals just have other priorities to think about like survival, they dont have the time for worrying about emotions to the extent we do.

>> No.7327346

>>7327322
>I really think we will start seeing more and more work on this and come to a realisation that we were wrong all along, animals just have other priorities to think about like survival, they dont have the time for worrying about emotions to the extent we do.
You have no reason to think that; they probably have even more 'free time' than many average wageslave humans, and even if you force someone to work constantly like a slave it doesn't magically make them less conscious.

>> No.7327348

>>7327346
You totally misunderstand what im talking about. Your scope of thinking is of individuals not of a species evolving over time. Read and comprehend before you remark retard

>> No.7327350

>>7327346
Are you a fucking idiot? He isn't talking about "free time" as you put it. Does a human generally wake up worried about how they are going to survive the day like an animal does? No of course not, this was true when we lived on the plains but not anymore.

>> No.7327363

perhaps one of the greatest certainties / uncertain we have is our underdevelopment before other unknown breeds

>> No.7327371

>>7327363
confused by this statement

>> No.7327386

basically same extent as us, minus a bit. hope this helps.

>> No.7327425

>>7324598
By consciousness do you mean awareness of yourself or do you simply mean qualia?

This is probably not clear to everyone, but as someone who has been around dogs most of my life, I can say that dogs definitely have an internal dialogue, and are thinking about things just like we are, just not as advanced concepts as what we think about. Our brains are really similar.

>> No.7327530

>>7327322
>survival
from what ?

>> No.7327554

>>7324622
>but without a brain there isn't consciousness

how do u kno this

>> No.7327803

>>7327322
>I really think we will start seeing more and more work on this and come to a realisation that we were wrong all along, animals just have other priorities to think about like survival, they dont have the time for worrying about emotions to the extent we do.

This.

>> No.7327842

Ann Butler has written extensively on this topic. Also see Tononi. There isn't specifically a consciousness test but there is plenty of research on aspects like attention and awareness in animals.

>> No.7327888

>hard problem of consciousness

did you actually except to find any satisfactory answer to that anywhere, especially on 4chan /sci/?

nice meme thread

>> No.7329154

>>7327530
From death....

>> No.7329165

>>7327888
you're right I guess

>> No.7329168

>>7324598
It depends on the complexity of their brains, i'd imagine.

>> No.7329177

higher animals are like children, dumb but otherwise conscious

lower animals may very well be just unsentient automatons, tough

>> No.7329218
File: 351 KB, 1296x1292, Stay Classy-or8.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7329218

>>7324598
lower animals are their worlds; they are what they feel; no reflexivity; they are solipsist and do not know that they are solipsist.

higher animals are realist, believe in reality, have more reflexivity. with humans having the most, at least potentially, but only a few humans experience the death of the self


>>7329154
my bet is that very few animals believe in their death. Humans do , but it comes with reflexivity and once you kill the self, our death does not matter

>> No.7329230

>>7329218
They dont have to believe in their death to have a lower but real consciousness though?

>> No.7329240

>>7329230
not to me, consciousness being a spectrum of reflexivity; a basic consciousness being the belief that you are not what makes you feel, then the higher consciousness would be that you are not your perceptions either (probably without knowing what you are, at least at he beginning)

death matters to those who are with basic consciousness. My bet is that bacteria and snails do not have notion of death. Higher animals flee when they are around predators, but it may be a blend of innate things, intuition, a heird reaction.

>> No.7329263

>>7329240
Yea i agree with you to an extent, but i think there is a difference between evolutionary survival from death (intuition, herd reaction, environmental reaction) and understanding your own demise. I say that even the animals who wouldnt probably understand that one day they are going to die are still conscious to a pretty large extent but its hard to realise this because their dominant behaviour is very much based on natural selection.

>> No.7329265

>>7329263
Also just wanted to say that sounds like some animal rights bullshit but I love nothing more than putting a hot .223 rem round through a deers heart and then eating that fucker.

>> No.7329331

>>7329265
wha tmotivates you to kill the animals ?

>> No.7329359

>>7329331
Getting meat from a wild sustainable resource not a farm

>> No.7329369

>>7324658
>Humans have reasons to do stuff
>Animals I think just act on instinct

How are these two things different??

>> No.7329381

>>7329359
and the killing specifically gives you pleasure ?

>> No.7329406

>>7326696
What defines being alive with regards to awareness?

>> No.7329430

>>7327371
Essentially he's referring to aliums.

>> No.7329433

>>7324696
just for you own good "why" is a shitty question. Use "how" if you want to stay sane.

>> No.7329437

>>7324619
Consciousness is something more the most basic of processing information. Consciousness defines things such as self-awareness and that's where the scale should begin, rather than basic awareness.

>> No.7329446

>>7324696
>>7324813

One of the most basic things people seem to get confused with evolution is trying to assign a reason to it. I mean this is how things are described, right? "A giraffe developed a long neck so it can eat higher leaves".
Nearly everyone describes evolutionary processes like this. Although the real reason is that the giraffe with the longer neck survived. This gene passed through them for generations, and I don't know how many changes it took for it to actually benefit them, but it happened and slowly they won out.

>> No.7329452

>>7329446
This. Whenever I catch myself or others thinking this way I simply remind myself/them that life is over 3.5 billion years old, plenty of time for adaptation to occur not actively but semi-passively.

>> No.7330213

>>7329452
yeahp

>> No.7330643

>>7329381
Yea cause then i get to eat it.

>> No.7330695

>>7324598
To what extent do you have consciousness? You're an animal ya dingus!

>> No.7330748

>>7326618
This is why I have the personal beliefs I do. Physicalism can't explain how things like self-awareness, emotions, memories arise from simple bio-mechanical processes. How exactly do minute electrical impulses in some gray head jelly and cardiac muscle = animation and sentience?

>> No.7330751

>>7326641
> How do no physical things like perceptions come from that?
how do you think a digital camera works?

>> No.7330756

>>7326641
There are no non physical things. Any claim that such things exist is self defeating because claims are physical.

>> No.7332081

>>7330751
This post makes no sense.

>> No.7332087

>>7330756
>There are no non physical things.
How about fields, how about everything in the fucking world you dingus.

>> No.7332089

>>7326641
Nobody knows that. That's what I'd like to know.

>> No.7332094

>>7332087
So you're saying there are no physical things and all of physics is pointless because it has nothing to do with reality?

>> No.7332101

>>7332094
>all of physics is pointless
Nice conclusion, fuckwad.
I'm saying there may be no physical things, yes.

>> No.7332137

>>7332087
What makes fields non-physical?

>> No.7332142

>>7332137
They aren't made of any object.

>> No.7332260

>>7332142
So, what is a physical thing? What is an "object" which it is acceptable for physical things to be made of? I would think it would be more appropriate to define the physicality of an object on whether or not it has measurable properties.

>> No.7332309

We're animals, so we're pretty much as far as it's gotten. So far.

>> No.7332315

>>7332260
Physical atoms.

>> No.7332361

>>7332315
And what are "physical atoms?"

>> No.7332394

>>7332361
Theoretical atoms that consist of physical material.
I'm getting tired of your shit.

>> No.7332519

>>7324598

To the extent that their neurobiology is an integrated and isolated system as described mathematically by Q-factor.

>> No.7333089
File: 865 KB, 2314x6548, ppmg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7333089

>>7332087
>How about fields, how about everything in the fucking world you dingus.
fields are just a concepts to describe what we see

>> No.7333661

>>7333089
>a concepts
In other words, they are non-physical things.

>> No.7333680

>>7326668
elephants and whales have very large brains and are capable of extraordinarily complex thought. The only problem that separates humans from whales in their ability to express their intellect is the fact that humans have thumbs and whales are missing a language part of their brain that humans have.