David Chalmers on the "hard problem" of consciousness - The Consciousness Chronicles Vol. 1

The Consciousness Chronicles is a new DVD series that explores the phenomenon of consciousness from many different angles. Each edition features exclusive in-depth interviews with some of the world's leading pioneers in consciousness research.

In this preview, philosopher David Chalmers asks how do we get consciousness from a brain?

To obtain your copy of The Consciousness Chronicles, go to http://www.consciousnesschronicles.com

Constructive comments are welcome - Moderator.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• consciousness
• chronicles
• science
• david
• chalmers
• philosophy
• hard
• problem
• brain
• mind
• awareness
• qualia
• sentience
• psychology
• ontology
• epsitomology
• research
• theory
• conference
• tucson
• materialism
• spirituality
• buddhism
• meditation
• pyschedelics
• altered
• states
• cosmos
• reality
• universe
• entanglement
• nonlocal
• superposition
• educational
• talk
• interview
• preview
• mysticism
• panpsychism
• idealism
• plato
• aristotle
• nature
• discussion
• hypnosis

[Cyanescia]

Yes I agree with you. I think the problem arises in people searching to find some kind of 'physical' mechanism which produces the 'conscious' aspect of all that brain activity. Yet, the discovery of such a mechanism would never explain how it goes from objective machinery to subjective experience. Though, the search is false. The problem is in thinking we are something other than the collection of brain processes we observe. That those processes 'feel' like us is simply an intrinsic fact.

[MrAquinoflavio]

@Cyanescia : The problem concerning qualia is an epistemological one, not an ontological one. From the third person we have an objective description of what it is, and from an 1st person we have a description of what it FEELS LIKE. Both are equaly valid, different descriptions of the same thing.

[MrAquinoflavio]

@Cyanescia : EXACLTY. The hard problem is nothing but a fruitless mystery.

Just because we cannot conceve phenomenology arising from higher neuronal functions, it doesnt mean it cant.

[joevegan123]

@SciTechExplained is there such a thing as a "pain sensation"? If yes: do we have a good scientific model explaining how it is generated?

[SciTechExplained]

@joevegan123 , off the subject now; it sounds to me that you're not stupid, you just have an agenda. Get over it: Qualia is dead, only science can explain anything, quit being such a insecure mysterion! bye

[SciTechExplained]

@joevegan123 , Lot's of math accounts for the reason to believe in dark matter and dark energy. so, partly, dark matter and dark energy have reasons for being postulated because they come out of the scientists' equations; more to it, scientists don't make stupid assumptions about what dark matter and dark energy might be as the qualophiles do regarding the supposedly misterious nature of the 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' of the brain that they superficially call qualia...

[Cyanescia]

I know the feeling. It's like when you think of vision. We can pin point the exact processes involved in the visual response to red wavelengths of light, but then how is that 'I see red.'

All I am saying is that 'I see red' and 'my brain processing responding to red wavelengths of light' are just one in the same thing.

That specific activity 'feels' like that specific activity. Just as a rock 'feels' like a rock.

There is no 'ghost in the machine'.... the ghost IS the machine.

Happy days

[joevegan123]

@Cyanescia I am trying to understand but I can't... it to my minds screams out for further explication..

[Cyanescia]

Yes, your right, we have 'indirect' access to consciousness because we see it as EM activity in the brain. Though of course we can never vouch for another person's subjective experience, hence it is called subjective for a reason. haha.

In fact this will interest you... the induction of outside EM activity to the brain of a patient, results in a change of consciousness.

Do you get what I mean that we are looking for 'something extra' when it may not be necessary?

[Cyanescia]

I could be wrong though. Perhaps we discover some 'consciousness' field which exist exclusively as a result of higher brain function. In that case we will still be with the same question 'how does that field give rise to subjective experience' That's what i meant by infinite regress earlier. It would come a point where we would conclusively state that the field we observe IS consciousness and that it 'just does' have a subjective quality to it.

I just think that field IS the EM field.