What is it that gives people a consciousness?

Post Reply New Topic

I didn't follow this step at all. I have said exactly the opposite. I have said that I am a machine, and I suggest that you are too. I say that the "I"/"conscious"/"ego" is an emergent phenomenon, associated with (probably all) sufficiently complex machines. If you can point out some reason why this is not the case, go ahead. I have seen no evidence of anything else being the case.

=========

WRT "free will" - that I indeed do have, so far as I can see. I have no idea how ouinon wants to define it, such that she does not have it. As a term, "free will" fits quite adequately to my subjective experience. I chose options. I see no reason to throw out words like "chose" - they are useful descriptors.

im sorry. this thread is getting confusing.

i am a machine.

but not in the sense of recognised machines that give accurate data, like a seismograph, or a mass spectrometer.

i am a machine that has an ego , an identity, a consciousness.

it is semantics the definition of a machine, an impression of a machine, the common expectation of usage of the word machine and marrying the definition of machine with emergent ideation to give a sentient functioning 46 chromosone carbon based human.

but i am not a machine.

i am sufficiently complex to be able to have an identity, an ego and argue with you what i am.

and because i can argue, i am right.
i cannot be wrong, it is my opinion.

a machine cant do this. a conscious machine can.

so i am a machine that can argue , can decide that i am not a machine. a complex machine.

so i am in agreement.....i and you are machines....but comlex machines. not just a machine, like a washing machine.


I say that the "I"/"conscious"/"ego" is an emergent phenomenon, associated with (probably all) sufficiently complex machines. If you can point out some reason why this is not the case, go ahead. I have seen no evidence of anything else being the case.


ok, try this..the universe is, in my opinion sufficiently complex.
planets, sun, asteroids.....galaxies......containing humans and all life.

is the universe a conscious entity?

does it have an identity?

i too see no evidence of this....but i also know that absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.

I mean contra-causal free-will, the kind of free-will which is viewed as independent of our genes, conditioning, environment, chemicals, food, etc; free-will as used to justify punishment, and to measure responsibility; free-will as believed to be above or beyond our "mere earthly frame"/outside the physical laws of the universe so far established.

I think that the term is more loaded with meaning/value in our culture, is more political, than just a way of describing our subjective experience of decision making.

And that meaning I do not believe in.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 29 Sep 2008, 4:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Infinite recursion?

But are these actions including your own thoughts really of your own choosing when viewed from a different level? So how free are you really or is it just a relative freedom as compared to beings less evolved than you?

I think the thing to ask is "Could I have chosen otherwise?" What evidence do you have for believing that you could?

You may believe that you could have, but you can not prove it. It is a question of faith.

One of the important consequences of this faith/belief is that then apportion blame ( our own, or others) , for not having chosen otherwise in certain situations, when in fact have no proof that could have. It is a belief that creates useless/harmful guilt and resentment.

.

Sorry, but I take full responsibility for everything that I do, and everything that happens to me.

That's the way this machine works - I have freedom of choice, and make those choices. I do not excuse myself.

Why be sorry?

On the other hand I can understand feeling sorry for such a lapse in logic as to think that absence of free will necessarily entails absence of responsibility for one's actions. There is no connection.

It is possible to take full responsibility for one's actions even if one does not believe that could have chosen differently. In fact it is the belief that could have chosen differently that in our society may contribute to reduced feelings of responsibility for things in general.

After all if one could have chosen/acted differently it is "almost" an accident. Whereas if could not have it is a tragedy, and one feels the weight of one's actions more fully.

PS: I don't understand why you feel responsible for what happens to you. Do you mean that if a plane landed on top of you you would believe that you were responsible for that happening?

.

Haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Yes.

lau's opinion is as valid as any others and i am not disagreeign with his view.
however, i feel i am not responsible for what happpens to me, but i am responsible for how i respond to it.
this has been my mantra and it allows me to own my actions and reactions.

if however there is another plane of thought that suggests one is responsible for what happens to them, i would be interested in hearing it.

I got tired, a long while back, of all the nit-pickng that can go on.

If I step out into the road, and a car hits me... how much of it is my fault? I now chose to take all the responsibility. Not that I wouldn't claim against the car driver's insurance company.... but that would be me living in "the real world". However, internally I will accept that I have drawn to event to myself, by being in that place, at that time, and stepping into the road without sufficient care - or indeed, with care to be run over.

If the proverbial asteroid flies down through the atmosphere, and removes one of my arms, say - that's still my will. I have not chosen to live in a concrete bunker, 30 feet below the surface of the planet.

If I die of old age, it is my own fault, for not devoting enough energy toward life extension and transhumanism.

The God of your own particular/personal/individual universe, ( independent of/isolated from everyone else's aswell) in other words.

Does this "principle" apply to everybody? The rape victim, the child-abused, the victim of a drink-and-drive car accident, the poor without food or water... ... ... or only to the white middle-class male in western society?

How do you parcel out the responsibility for someone talking to you? What if they take the same position as you, and insist that it is they who are responsible for your talking to them?

Or what if they would just like you to acknowledge that they are responsible for what comes out of their mouth?

.

I think you misread me. I nowhere say that anyone else is obliged to think as I do. I merely state my own philosophy.

Consciousness is the will to exist.

I know you didn't, I did not misread you. My first question was because I was curious whether you thought this mode of functioning was "true" about everybody's lives.

But whether or not other people believe that their life functions like that, your belief seems to imply that anyone relating to you is not responsible for their actions, because it is you that is.

Your belief doesn't seem to allow them to be talking to you because of something about them, not if you consider that you are entirely responsible for everything that happens to you. And it would seem to mean that all people present in your life are under your control, are purely "reactions" to you, and can only experience independence if they leave your life completely, and then only if something that you do/did allows them to!

And the person who runs you over; do you think he should feel any responsibility, or just think, "No, it's Lau that I ran over. It must have been something that he wanted, and manufactured, so I can stop feeling awful about it, because I am not even responsible for the accident" ?