Levels Of Understanding For The Human Visual Experience

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Overlapping topics merged

 

[Bufofrog]

14 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

The CLF would be mistaken if it thinks it Sees even the reflected Light. All it can do is Detect the reflected Light.

So one dog can't see another dog it can only visually detect the other dog?  How is that not just semantics?

16 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

Unfortunately the experience of Redness, at least for now, can not be found in the Brain or explained by Brain Activity.

Of course it can!  Do you think it is liver or kidney activity?

19 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

Redness is in a whole different Category of Phenomena than any known and existent Scientific Category of Phenomena.

Nope, there is no sound for instance, just pressure waves that our brain interprets as sound.

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, SteveKlinko said:

What is the best answer for how the Neural Activity produces Conscious Experience. Let's use the Perception or Experience of the Color Red as an example. Given:

1) Neural Activity for Red happens.
2) A Conscious Experience of Redness happens.

How does 1 produce 2? In other words what would you put in between 1 and 2? 

Are you ever going to tell us how you think your non-physical solution works? 

1 hour ago, SteveKlinko said:

I don't know what the answer is.

So the whole purpose of this thread is what?

[SteveKlinko]

3 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

So one dog can't see another dog it can only visually detect the other dog?  How is that not just semantics?

Of course it can!  Do you think it is liver or kidney activity?

Nope, there is no sound for instance, just pressure waves that our brain interprets as sound.

Most people do think they See the actual dog . That would be a Level #1 (Naïve Realism) understanding of how we See. At the Higher Levels we realize that we don't See the actual dog in the way we thought we did. No semantics here.

I'll take your Liver or Kidney comment at an attempt at grade school humor.

Yes but the issue is how does the Brain interpret Auditory signals as Sound?

 

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

the issue is how does the Brain interpret Auditory signals as Sound?

Through practice

[SteveKlinko]

2 hours ago, zapatos said:

Are you ever going to tell us how you think your non-physical solution works? 

So the whole purpose of this thread is what?

The purpose of this thread is to point out that Consciousness is not Explained by any theory of Science. Nobody knows how Consciousness works or what Consciousness is. Maybe I'm wrong but aren't you one of the people that thinks that Consciousness is all already Explained by Science? 

Just now, iNow said:

Through practice

That's the best non answer I have ever heard.

[iNow]

1 minute ago, SteveKlinko said:

Maybe I'm wrong but

You are

2 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

That's the best non answer I have ever heard

And yet it was correct

[SteveKlinko]

Conscious Experience Is A Type Of Data

Scientists can describe the Neural Activity that occurs in the Brain when we See. But they seem to be completely puzzled by the Conscious Visual experience that we have that is correlated with the Neural Activity. Incredibly, some even come to the conclusion that the Conscious experience is not even necessary! They can not find the Conscious experience in the Neurons so the experience must not have any function in the Visual process. They believe that the Neural Activity is sufficient for us to move around in the world without bumping into things. This is insane denial of the obvious purpose for Visual Consciousness. Neural Activity is not enough. We would be blind without the Conscious Visual experience. From a Systems Engineering point of view it is clear that the Conscious Visual experience is a further Processing stage that comes after the Neural Activity. The Conscious Visual experience is the thing that allows us to move around in the world. The Conscious Visual experience contains vast amounts of information about the external world all packed up into a single thing. To implement all the functionality of the Conscious Visual experience with only Neural Activity would probably require a Brain as big as a refrigerator.

 

Scientists should not disregard the Conscious Visual experience. It's just another type of Data that can be analyzed. We should call it Conscious Data. We use and analyze this Conscious Visual Data all the time without realizing it. For example when I reach for my coffee mug I have a Conscious Visual experience where I See my hand moving toward the coffee mug. If My hand is off track I sense this in the Conscious Visual experience and adjust the movement of my hand. If I did not have the Conscious Visual experience I would not be able to pick up my coffee mug, or at least it would be much more difficult with just Neural Activity. So the Conscious Visual experience is just Data that helps us interact with the world. This Conscious Visual Data is absolutely necessary for us to function. Similar arguments can be made for the Conscious Auditory experience, the Conscious Smell experience, the Conscious Taste experience, and the Conscious Touch experience. All these experiences are just a type of Data that our Conscious Minds can analyze.

 

The Conscious Mind concept, which will be developed in the Inter Mind paper, can be viewed as a kind of Conscious Processor that takes the Conscious Light, Sound, Smell, Taste, and Touch Experiences as Input Data to help it survive in the world. This is a very strange kind of Processing (although actually very familiar) and it is very different from the Processing that Computers can do. The Processing that the Conscious Mind does is also very different than the Neural Processing that the Brain does. Let's talk about the Color Red. In the Physical World we know that Red Light is an oscillating Electromagnetic phenomenon with a particular wavelength associated with it. In the Brain Red is the coordinated Firing of groups of specific Neurons. In the Conscious Mind Red is an Experience. In Computers Red is usually represented as the hex number 00FF0000 stored in a memory location. Electromagnetic Phenomena, Firing Neurons, the Red Experience, and the Number 00FF0000 are completely different kinds of Data.

17 minutes ago, iNow said:

You are

And yet it was correct

It was a non answer plus it was not even correct. You must be talking about some kind of development process that all areas of the Brain undergo as they develop. But right now in the present moment after all the practice is done, there must be some process going on in the Neurons that is involved in the Experience of something like the Standard A Tone. What is that process? 

Edited December 8, 2020 by SteveKlinko

[iNow]

16 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

You must be talking about some kind of development process that all areas of the Brain undergo as they develop. But right now in the present moment after all the practice is done

That practice is never done. You should explore the concept of neural plasticity instead of making stuff up about what you think consciousness is

 

[zapatos]

32 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

The purpose of this thread is to point out that Consciousness is not Explained by any theory of Science. Nobody knows how Consciousness works or what Consciousness is.

Still waiting...

33 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

Maybe I'm wrong but aren't you one of the people that thinks that Consciousness is all already Explained by Science? 

You are wrong. I am one of those people who thinks we still have more to learn, while being confident that consciousness can be explained by science without the need for woo.

[iNow]

35 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

there must be some process going on in the Neurons that is involved in the Experience of something like the Standard A Tone. What is that process? 

The name of the site is not intended as insult. It is a useful way to present these concepts and might be a good place for you to begin:

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/hearing.html 

[Bufofrog]

1 hour ago, SteveKlinko said:

Most people do think they See the actual dog .

This is clearly a waste of time.

[SteveKlinko]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

That practice is never done. You should explore the concept of neural plasticity instead of making stuff up about what you think consciousness is

 

How does Neural Plasticity produce the Conscious Experience of the Standard A Tone? 

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

Still waiting...

You are wrong. I am one of those people who thinks we still have more to learn, while being confident that consciousness can be explained by science without the need for woo.

What gives you the confidence that something like Redness or the Standard A Tone can be explained by Neural Activity. But I guess  said it will be explained by Science. So you are Implying that there really is something more than Neural Activity needed to Explain the Experience of Redness or the Standard A Tone and Science will find it.

41 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

This is clearly a waste of time.

Bye.

[iNow]

5 hours ago, SteveKlinko said:

How does Neural Plasticity produce the Conscious Experience of the Standard A Tone? 

I never said it did. When did you stop beating your wife?

Edited December 9, 2020 by iNow

[SteveKlinko]

10 hours ago, iNow said:

I never said it did. When did you stop beating your wife?

What does then?

[iNow]

Practice

[SteveKlinko]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Practice

So in your mind it looks like all you have to do is say the word "Practice" and you have explained how you hear the Standard A Tone. Not very Scientific or even Logical.

[iNow]

I've said more than that, but you've ignored it. I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 

[SteveKlinko]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

I've said more than that, but you've ignored it. I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. 

I am slow and methodical. So indulge Me and help Me understand. I apologize if you feel like you are repeating something, but what is your basic Explanation for how Neural Activity in the Brain becomes the Standard A Tone that I experience?

[iNow]

See link above

[SteveKlinko]

19 hours ago, iNow said:

See link above

The link is elementary school physiology of the ear and hearing. It says nothing about where the Sound Experience that you have in your Mind comes from. I can see you really do not understand the issue. Your link only describes the Neural Correlates of Conscious Experience.  It actually makes no attempt to Explain the Conscious Experience itself,  which comes after all the Ear Mechanics and then after the Neural Activity. You should think Directly and more Deeply about the Conscious Experience of the Standard A Tone itself.  

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, SteveKlinko said:

You should think Directly and more Deeply about the Conscious Experience of the Standard A Tone itself.  

You should look into why the 'shift' key on your keyboard randomly capitalizes words.

Your argument is reminiscent of religion's "goddidit". By hammering away at a single aspect of brain activity that cannot yet be clearly described you hope to get us to make the leap that it must be magic, or god, or whatever it is you are getting at but refusing to actually articulate.

Just because you cannot get a satisfactory scientific description does not mean "The Visual Light Experience simply hovers and is embedded in the front of our faces."

That type of explanation is never going to fly on this site.

[SteveKlinko]

19 minutes ago, zapatos said:

You should look into why the 'shift' key on your keyboard randomly capitalizes words.

Your argument is reminiscent of religion's "goddidit". By hammering away at a single aspect of brain activity that cannot yet be clearly described you hope to get us to make the leap that it must be magic, or god, or whatever it is you are getting at but refusing to actually articulate.

Just because you cannot get a satisfactory scientific description does not mean "The Visual Light Experience simply hovers and is embedded in the front of our faces."

That type of explanation is never going to fly on this site.

At least you seem to understand what a Conscious Experience of the Standard A Tone is. You seem to understand that this is not Explained by the Link that iNow posted. I don't make any claims about having Explanations for the Experience of the Standard A Tone or how we See. But the Visual Light Experience that I describe is also not an Explanation and is not intended to be an Explanation. It is merely an Observation of how things are. It is simply a fact that: The Visual Light Experience hovers and is embedded in the front of our Faces. What we need is an Explanation for How that Visual Light Experience actually happens.

[zapatos]

30 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

It is merely an Observation of how things are. It is simply a fact that: The Visual Light Experience hovers and is embedded in the front of our Faces.

No, that is not a fact. It's not even a good analogy. You need to come up with something scientific if you want to discuss it on a science site.

[iNow]

33 minutes ago, SteveKlinko said:

What we need is an Explanation for How that Visual Light Experience actually happens.

We have this explanation, you just choose to reject it arbitrarily. It involves neural activation in specific areas and specific patterns. Those excitements are cascaded into areas of our brain related to awareness and language, and we impose previously learned language and concepts on to all new information coming in in a dynamic attempt to make sense of it.

There's variance in the way this all works and it will be affected by past experiences and current environmental variables like fatigue, thirst, hunger, surroundings, stress levels, distractions, etc. 

You can simply proclaim that I don't understand all day long. Doesn't bother me. You're asking the equivalent of why the sky is blue, and rejecting others who patiently explain it's about Rayleigh scattering of photons which then interact with our visual complexes in specific measurable ways. 

Start asking clearer questions. Maybe you'll get clearer answers. Right now, all of your posts about standard A tones makes you look rather like a standard A hole.