We still have no idea how the brain produces conscious awareness. In this excellent short video produced by The Economist, various experts are called upon to explain the “hard problem” that is consciousness, and how scientists might solve this profound mystery.
For the video, The Economist gathered together an impressive collection of philosophers and scientists, including David Chalmers, Daniel Dennett, Christof Koch, Janet Metcalfe, and Marcus Raichle. Topics discussed include the evolution of consciousness, the binding problem, and theory of mind.
H/t Mind Hacks!
It can be proposed in Gestalt neurology that ordinal CNS phase spaces are utilized through objective/subjective sensory apparati to cogitate and manufacture allomatic modules of problem-solving ideas, praexology and mechanistics. Decoding ordinal CNS phase spaces as biophysical processes of Computation are also a function of entropic, thermodynamic state horizon event re/action, in which the MW/MM future is causally experientiated via time inversion and local entropy as present Object-interactive-time relativistically in R^4 gravitational retrocausality from advance waves e.g. quantum nonlocality elements such as two-state vector formalism, coherence/decoherence, entanglement and Bell’s Theorems.
Gestalt and Inverse-Gestalt Theory as a two-state theoretical system also utilizes the computational ability of symbol-value calculation and representation comprehension meaning syntactical proper and accurate computation and operation of given symbol values in global or concurrent sets as a possible answer to the proposed Systems Reply of Searle’s Problem.
The complexity of computation retention mechanics and scaling in the pyramidal model of Moravec’s paradox and in distributed memory and [Shannon] information inequality computation and relay challenges parameter delimits in discrete Quantum Neural Networks [QNN] in Theoretical and Applied –Physical methods where DenoteS ≡ progressionSi(⊥S).
Great video from an unlikely source (When did the The Economist begin making psychology videos?!)…
But, I wonder if the various scientists and philosophers are talking about the same thing. I sensed a subtle dissonance in the definition of “consciousness”.
In my take, the elephants playing on the video and my own dog are clearly conscious…Not just awake and aware of others, but likely to appreciate their own existence, were they to somehow be directed to think about it.
The dissonance in the various researchers and pundits is this: Does the fact that I cannot find a way to direct my dog’s attention to his sense of self (or perhaps I can succeed, but I have no way to know if I have succeeded) — Does this fact mean that she is disqualified from being considered conscious? That seems a bit human-arrogant. In fact, it is reverse anthropomorphism!