I agree with Saibal on this and welcome his great explanation. Not to miss out 
on not giving credit where credit is due, let me invoke Donald Hoffman as their 
chief proponent of conscious agents. Or, the best 
known.http://cogsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/Chapter17Hoffman.pdf


-----Original Message-----
From: smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl>
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, Jun 19, 2021 7:17 am
Subject: Re: Which philosopher or neuro/AI scientist has the best theory of 
consciousness?

Information is the key.  Conscious agents are defined by precisely that 
information that specifies the content of their consciousness. This 
means that a conscious agent can never be precisely located in some 
physical object, because the information that describes the conscious 
experience will always be less detailed than the information present in 
the exact physical description of an object such a brain. There are 
always going to be a very large self localization ambiguity due to the 
large number of different possible brain states that would generate 
exactly the same conscious experience. So, given whatever conscious 
experience the agent has, the agent could be in a very large number of 
physically distinct states.

The simpler the brain and the algorithm implemented by the brain, the 
larger this self-localization ambiguity becomes because smaller 
algorithms contain less detailed information. Our conscious experiences 
localizes us very precisely on an Earth-like planet in a solar system 
that is very similar to the one we think we live in. But the fly walking 
on the wall of the room I'm in right now may have some conscious 
experience that is exactly identical to that of another fly walking on 
the wall of another house in another country 600 years ago or on some 
rock in a cave 35 million year ago.

The conscious experience of the fly I see on the all is therefore not 
located in the particular fly I'm observing. This is i.m.o. the key 
thing you get from identifying consciousness with information, it makes 
the multiverse an essential ingredient of consciousness. This resolves 
paradoxes you get in thought experiments where you consider simulating a 
brain in a virtual world and then argue that since the simulation is 
deterministic, you could replace the actual computer doing the 
computations by a device playing a recording of the physical brain 
states. This argument breaks down if you take into account the 
self-localization ambiguity and consider that this multiverse aspect is 
an essential part of consciousness due to counterfactuals necessary to 
define the algorithm being realized, which is impossible in a 
deterministic single-world setting.

Saibal


On 18-06-2021 20:46, Jason Resch wrote:
> In your opinion who has offered the best theory of consciousness to
> date, or who do you agree with most? Would you say you agree with them
> wholeheartedly or do you find points if disagreement?
> 
> I am seeing several related thoughts commonly expressed, but not sure
> which one or which combination is right.  For example:
> 
> Hofstadter/Marchal: self-reference is key
> Tononi/Tegmark: information is key
> Dennett/Chalmers: function is key
> 
> To me all seem potentially valid, and perhaps all three are needed in
> some combination. I'm curious to hear what other viewpoints exist or
> if there are other candidates for the "secret sauce" behind
> consciousness I might have missed.
> 
> Jason
> 
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUik%3Du724L6JxAKi0gq-rPfV%3DXwGd7nS2kmZ_znLd7MT1g%40mail.gmail.com
> [1].
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUik%3Du724L6JxAKi0gq-rPfV%3DXwGd7nS2kmZ_znLd7MT1g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/bd53588153f2debae241dbb41e48b60a%40zonnet.nl.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/901280005.1412392.1624123221433%40mail.yahoo.com.

Reply via email to