patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,189,912 comments by 13,850 users - Fullerton, Onvacation online now
Are We Close To Solving the Puzzle of Consciousness ?
invite response
2019 Mar 30, 5:06pm 777 views 6 comments
Comments 1 - 6 of 6 Search these comments
1
anonymous
2019 Apr 4, 7:04am
Is consciousness a battle between your beliefs and perceptions?
Imagine you’re at a magic show, in which the performer suddenly vanishes. Of course, you ultimately know that the person is probably just hiding somewhere. Yet it continues to look as if the person has disappeared. We can’t reason away that appearance, no matter what logic dictates. Why are our conscious experiences so stubborn?
The fact that our perception of the world appears to be so intransigent, however much we might reflect on it, tells us something unique about how our brains are wired. Compare the magician scenario with how we usually process information. Say you have five friends who tell you it’s raining outside, and one weather website indicating that it isn’t. You’d probably just consider the website to be wrong and write it off. But when it comes to conscious perception, there seems to be something strangely persistent about what we see, hear and feel. Even when a perceptual experience is clearly ‘wrong’, we can’t just mute it.
Why is that so? Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) shed new light on this puzzle. In computer science, we know that neural networks for pattern-recognition – so-called deep learning models – can benefit from a process known as predictive coding. Instead of just taking in information passively, from the bottom up, networks can make top-down hypotheses about the world, to be tested against observations. They generally work better this way. When a neural network identifies a cat, for example, it first develops a model that allows it to predict or imagine what a cat looks like. It can then examine any incoming data that arrives to see whether or not it fits that expectation.
More: https://aeon.co/ideas/is-consciousness-a-battle-between-your-beliefs-and-perceptions
Imagine you’re at a magic show, in which the performer suddenly vanishes. Of course, you ultimately know that the person is probably just hiding somewhere. Yet it continues to look as if the person has disappeared. We can’t reason away that appearance, no matter what logic dictates. Why are our conscious experiences so stubborn?
The fact that our perception of the world appears to be so intransigent, however much we might reflect on it, tells us something unique about how our brains are wired. Compare the magician scenario with how we usually process information. Say you have five friends who tell you it’s raining outside, and one weather website indicating that it isn’t. You’d probably just consider the website to be wrong and write it off. But when it comes to conscious perception, there seems to be something strangely persistent about what we see, hear and feel. Even when a perceptual experience is clearly ‘wrong’, we can’t just mute it.
Why is that so? Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) shed new light on this puzzle. In computer science, we know that neural networks for pattern-recognition – so-called deep learning models – can benefit from a process known as predictive coding. Instead of just taking in information passively, from the bottom up, networks can make top-down hypotheses about the world, to be tested against observations. They generally work better this way. When a neural network identifies a cat, for example, it first develops a model that allows it to predict or imagine what a cat looks like. It can then examine any incoming data that arrives to see whether or not it fits that expectation.
More: https://aeon.co/ideas/is-consciousness-a-battle-between-your-beliefs-and-perceptions
2
Heraclitusstudent
2019 Apr 4, 9:56am
Heraclitusstudent
2019 Apr 4, 9:56am
Kakistocracy says
What does have to do with consciousness? Nothing.
Kakistocracy says
This theory provides no clue about what consciousness is. It just describes it, and in a very superficial way.
Kakistocracy says
This is the kind of sentence that shows an author has no clue what he is talking about.
If I designed a robot with an AI that observes the world, recognizes objects, and understands phenomenons, and also observes itself in the world, I could say this robot is "aware", even "self-aware". Yet it would explain nothing about consciousness.
Would such a robot get the sensation of "blue"? Clearly not. A number in the memory representing "blue" is not the same as having the sensation of blueness I'm having.
Would such a robot be capable of feeling pain, just because it is "aware" of its environment?
No more than a word processor feels pain why you make a typo.
When a neural network identifies a cat, for example, it first develops a model that allows it to predict or imagine what a cat looks like. It can then examine any incoming data that arrives to see whether or not it fits that expectation.
What does have to do with consciousness? Nothing.
Kakistocracy says
Tononi may have a solution to these puzzles. His "integrated information theory" is one of the most exciting theories of consciousness to have emerged over the last few years, and although it is not yet proven, it provides some testable hypotheses that may soon give a definitive answer.
This theory provides no clue about what consciousness is. It just describes it, and in a very superficial way.
Kakistocracy says
When you or I perform an action, our minds are filled with a complex conscious experience.
This is the kind of sentence that shows an author has no clue what he is talking about.
If I designed a robot with an AI that observes the world, recognizes objects, and understands phenomenons, and also observes itself in the world, I could say this robot is "aware", even "self-aware". Yet it would explain nothing about consciousness.
Would such a robot get the sensation of "blue"? Clearly not. A number in the memory representing "blue" is not the same as having the sensation of blueness I'm having.
Would such a robot be capable of feeling pain, just because it is "aware" of its environment?
No more than a word processor feels pain why you make a typo.
3
Shaman
2019 Apr 4, 10:13am
Shaman
2019 Apr 4, 10:13am
There’s nothing more ridiculous than a conscious mind engaged in vigorous thought, debate, and study to prove that consciousness doesn’t exist.
4
anonymous
2019 Apr 4, 12:26pm
5
EBGuy
2019 Apr 4, 5:38pm
Don Hoffman is one of my favorite scientists working in this area.
www.youtube.com/embed/oadgHhdgRkI
www.youtube.com/embed/oadgHhdgRkI
6
marcus
2019 Apr 4, 8:05pm
marcus
2019 Apr 4, 8:05pm
EBGuy says
Pretty hard to fathom. Seems like just a frame of reference he describes, but not the truth either, even if he's right about what we see not being the truth.. But maybe I just don't fully get it. Very interesting all the same. Thanks.
Don Hoffman
Pretty hard to fathom. Seems like just a frame of reference he describes, but not the truth either, even if he's right about what we see not being the truth.. But maybe I just don't fully get it. Very interesting all the same. Thanks.
Can a lobster feel pain in the same way as you or I?
We know that they have the same sensors – called nociceptors – that cause us to flinch or cry when we are hurt. And they certainly behave like they are sensing something unpleasant. When a chef places them in boiling water, for instance, they twitch their tails as if they are in agony.
But are they actually “aware” of the sensation? Or is that response merely a reflex?
When you or I perform an action, our minds are filled with a complex conscious experience. We can’t just assume that this is also true for other animals, however – particularly ones with such different brains from our own. It’s perfectly feasible – some scientists would even argue that it’s likely – that a creature like a lobster lacks any kind of internal experience, compared to the rich world inside our head.
“With a dog, who behaves quite a lot like us, who is in a body which is not too different from ours, and who has a brain that is not too different from ours, it’s much more plausible that it sees things and hears things very much like we do, than to say that it is completely ‘dark inside’, so to speak,” says Giulio Tononi, a neuroscientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “But when it comes down to a lobster, all bets are off.”
The question of whether other brains – quite alien to our own – are capable of awareness, is just one of the many conundrums that arise when scientists start thinking about consciousness. When does an awareness of our own being first emerge in the brain? Why does it feel the way it does? And will computers ever be able to achieve the same internal life?
Tononi may have a solution to these puzzles. His "integrated information theory" is one of the most exciting theories of consciousness to have emerged over the last few years, and although it is not yet proven, it provides some testable hypotheses that may soon give a definitive answer.
Knowing what consciousness is, and how it came about, is crucial to understanding our place in the universe and what we do with our lives – Giulio Tononi
More: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190326-are-we-close-to-solving-the-puzzle-of-consciousness
#Consciousness #Self #Philosophy #Psychology #Science