LISTSERV - TOK-SOCIETY-L Archives

He builds his argument saying that locked-in syndrome is an event of having consciousness without a body. That seems contrary to observable facts. The organs supporting the physical systems where consciousness takes place are within the body, as is the brain. A body that otherwise does not function is a horror beyond horrors, but it remains as a necessary body to that consciousness.

I also wonder if robot rights have a firm base in anything more than the whimsical? Reducing consciousness to data processing relies on a concept of consciousness based on an anthropomorphism of computers. I see it as dangerously misleading. I think we need to leave all metaphors for consciousness behind. One of the dangers is exactly what Harris is doing here and reversing the metaphor from equivocating consciousness with data processing to equivocating data processing with consciousness. Maybe we should never say that robots behave; what they do is function. It also relies on a mind-body dualism, as per above, rather than respecting the full-body experience of consciousness. As you say, consciousness requires witnessing, which requires our senses and only then can it have memories for reflection.

As far as knowing the certainty of consciousness, isn’t this what Descartes said?

I remember when first trying to understand the concepts of behaviorism I went to sleep those winter nights trying to suss out the schedule of behavior of my furnace as it went off and on, maintaining the temperature I had chosen. I failed. It does not behave.

I also cannot jive with Harris’ concept of consciousness that he has put forth elsewhere, that thoughts "just pop into our heads”.

Thank you for sharing your inspiring journey.

Peter

Peter Lloyd Jones
[log in to unmask]
562-209-4080

Sent by determined causes that no amount of will is able to thwart.

On Sep 21, 2020, at 9:32 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi Folks,
I thought this 6 minute clip on consciousness was worthwhile:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpaDlIlqygE

Of course, with the BM3 solution, we can make significant advances in the “descriptive metaphysical system” that surrounds this set of claims.

Also, I was thinking it might be helpful to point out how I would frame his point about consciousness being the only thing we can know for certain. The UTOK would say that a consciousness event is the intersection of the ontic reality of being, epistemology, and ontology. That is, whatever you are experiencing is real in-and-of-itself, is the product of a witnessing experiencing functioning that is an ontological fundamental reality.

I think Rob Scott might put it as the moment of “is-ness”. Is that fair, Rob?

Best,
Gregg

___________________________________________
Gregg Henriques, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Graduate Psychology
216 Johnston Hall
MSC 7401
James Madison University
Harrisonburg, VA 22807
(540) 568-7857 (phone)
(540) 568-4747 (fax)

Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.
Check out the Unified Theory Of Knowledge homepage at:
https://www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org/

############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1