Re: Definition of phenomenal consciousness
by charon on October 27th, 2020, 5:39 am
Thank you, Dave, that's a good answer.
It's not a problem if you're not a scientist who wants to know how everything works. In fact, it's probably just taken for granted as the way things are; it's how we operate in life. So it's not a problem unless the body or mind goes wrong in some way.
But, if one is a scientist, then it's a different matter.
I'd say it was obviously not just a question of neurons because of the psychological factor. I think that we can safely say that the brain's function physically is one thing and the operation of our minds is another.
The brain controls the body's reactions, nerves, and all that. The mind, however, is slightly different insofar as it involves the brain but apparently operates somewhat independently.
The mind, chiefly, is a thought process arising from stored information in the brain. The brain records memory, which is knowledge gained from experience, and thought is the response of that.
So the question then is what is experience? It seems to me there are two kinds, the external and internal.
We have senses. We can tell when it's hot or cold, light or dark, and so on. The body will react to those things. If there was no psychological reaction we wouldn't know anything about it. The responses of the body must be recognised and named in order for experience to register.
When the temperature drops, and we recognise this and say 'It's cold', that is an experience. That experience is registered as knowledge/memory. Then we can tell someone later that it was cold.
The naming also comes from knowledge because from childhood we've been told what cold is. That, of course, applies to all the other senses in all fields of life.
There's no question that this recognition of cold is a subjective experience. Unless there's something wrong with the body and mind everybody feels the same thing.
Of course, if the scientist wants to know whether everybody feels exactly the same thing that's a different matter. At the moment I don't think that's possible although there's no reason to suppose that the process isn't the same.
Then we have subjective experiences that don't come directly from the outside. They can be physical, like feeling discomfort for some medical reason, or psychological, like feeling excited or lonely.
Inward feelings don't originate from the physical body although they affect it. Worry, for instance, produces physical effects, like a tight stomach and other symptoms. But the psychological feelings originate in the mind, which is thinking.
We have awareness of ourselves. We can tell others what we are thinking and feeling. The way we think can be confused and contradictory or fairly clear and simple. If we become upset or excited it's because of our reactions to life's events.
All those feelings are subjective experiences which, again, can be recognised by the experiencer. We've heard, or been told, what anger or jealousy is so we can recognise it in ourselves. Where the effects display outwardly we can also recognise them in others.
All this is a unitary combination of the mind, brain and body. We can separate them verbally for clarity's sake but we operate, essentially, as a total unit. It certainly involves neurons since without the brain it wouldn't be possible at all. But it also involves the brain's capacity for memory, thought and recognition.
All this is our consciousness. The word implies, not only knowing, which is recognition from memory, but awareness.
One question is whether this awareness is sensory or not. Is the experiencing of, say, loneliness sensate? Is it on the same level as experiencing heat or cold? The experiencing of heat or cold is certainly sensate, from the physical senses. But is it the same with internal feelings?
I don't see why it shouldn't be, although I think there's more to awareness than that. Thought is allied to the body and brain. Thought and feeling is sensate too. A thought arises from sensation. Thought is sensation. A frightening thought is a sensation, surely? Just as pleasurable thoughts are a sensation.
But, to my mind, how is it that we're aware at all? Or conscious at all? All these processes could be going on - both physical and psychological - by themselves without the least awareness. The clouds, the rain, storms, all happen but no one supposes they tell themselves that they're happening.
So how do we know about all this? At the instant of something happening there's no recognition, no consciousness of it. It's a second later that the event is registered, which then becomes memory and experience. If an event is not registered there's no recollection of it.
So our consciousness is an accumulation of all past experiences, not only the superficial daily events of our lives, but the whole evolutionary history of humanity. All that is written into each one of us.
How are we aware of all this? What is the 'light' that makes it all possible? This isn't the light of the sun or a man-made light, this is an awareness that may have nothing to do with the physical process of memory and thought.
If that process, which is movement, is absent, which is possible, then there's an awareness which is independent of all sensate processes. It's a light which has no cause.
I think we should differentiate clearly between what is called consciousness and that awareness. We aren't generally aware of that awareness because we're immersed in our conscious thoughts and occupations. But, if all that is in abeyance, it's there.
I know at this point many people will say 'Oh, he's gone all woo-woo' and decry it but I can't help that; they don't know and aren't willing to consider it. But it is a fact nevertheless.
Exactly what that awareness is is another thing. I don't think the mind as thought can capture it, it's just there. But without it there'd be no awareness of anything.
I can predict with some certainty that this may be labelled 'Panpsychism'. I wish they wouldn't because we have a habit of labelling things and then dismissing them. If we've labelled it we must know all about it. But, of course, we don't.