From 40347f5622c41eab5cde6425d7e4cbd8183f8df5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kai Stevenson
- Consider reading my essay concerning analogies prior to continuing this article. -
Defining consciousness is itself no easy task. The term has been used by various authors in various ways, and each of @@ -33,7 +29,7 @@ require($_SERVER["DOCUMENT_ROOT"] . "/header.php"); It is the opinion of some authors that this description of the brain minimizes human agency. I reject this--human agency is itself a product of the process I have described, and cannot be minimized by a description of its origin. The reason for this concern can likely be ascribed to the long-standing belief in some form of soul, or other intangible, immeasurable - entity separate from the mechanical processes of the brain. + entity separate from the mechanical processes of the brain. The brain evidently determines behaviour.
@@ -44,12 +40,34 @@ require($_SERVER["DOCUMENT_ROOT"] . "/header.php"); or godliness; created at conception, or repurposed, from some prior incarnation in rebirth; or whether it is located in the heart, or in the pineal gland--the soul is a concept that has been invented by multiple independant cultures over human history, and is deeply important to the philosophy and religion of a significant portion of those alive today. + The specific reason for the prevalence of a belief in the soul is easily ascribed to humans' perception of ourselves + as conscious, and a desire to understand the origin and nature of that consciousness. + The soul evidently determines behaviour.
If the brain adequately explains human psychology, if thoughts are merely specific patterns of neurons firing, it seems that there is no place for the soul in modern science.
++ Consider reading my essay concerning analogies prior to continuing this article. + Philosophers, and those experiencing existential crises, have frequently referenced a set of thought experiments concerning + a common theme: that the consensus material world may not be real, or, more precisely, that it may not be the base stratum + of objectivity. Possibly the first record of this concern was René Descartes's evil demon argument, which posits that + one's senses may be an illusion created by some malevolent agent--an all powerful demon capable of inducing to you any sensory + perception he chooses. A more modern phrasing is the brain in a jar scenario. In this case, some future technology + enables the brain to be suspended and kept living inside of an artificial environment. This brain is precisely stimulated + by computer, generating a simulated perception of a reality, which could be entirely different from the one the brain is + located in. Other, analogous arguments include the Boltzmann Brain, the simulation hypothesis, and certain interpretations + of hell, heaven, and purgatory. +
++ Consider these arguments. They are irrefutable--we must live as though they are false, but we cannot prove that they are. We can, + however, take one important point from them: regardless of what specific reality we may interpret, and what specific reality may + truly exist, it is evident that we have an acute sense of our own existence as some form of entity; it is unclear whether we are being + tricked, but it is clear that there is something to be tricked. +
Suppose we had access to some form of device capable of precisely measuring the exact state of every neuron and neurotransmitter -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2