Dennett - Consciousness Explained

Consciousness Explained (1991) is a book by the American philosopher Daniel Dennett which offers an account of how consciousness arises from interaction of physical and cognitive processes in the brain.

The book puts forward a "multiple drafts" model of consciousness, suggesting that there is no single central place (a "Cartesian Theater") where conscious experience occurs; instead there are "various events of content-fixation occurring in various places at various times in the brain".[1] The brain consists of a "bundle of semi-independent agencies";[2] when "content-fixation" takes place in one of these, its effects may propagate so that it leads to the utterance of one of the sentences that make up the story in which the central character is one's "self". Dennett's view of consciousness is that it is the apparently serial account for the brain's underlying parallelism.

Consciousness Explained:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness_Explained

Daniel Dennett:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett

Dennett Harvard Distinguished Lecturer Series - Playlists
1 Brain as Computer
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=5C955B23D9840AFE
2 Consciousness
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=F5D8AEFB0F302C66
3 Culture, language, memes
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=746FC107A335BCEF

This is a mirror of a video that was originally uploaded by LennyBound. Because his channel has two strikes, he has suggested that his videos be mirrored because he is concerned that his videos might be lost if his channel suffers another hit.
http://www.youtube.com/user/LennyBound

"This is an excerpt from an episode of "Big Thinkers" which was a half-hour long documentary program on ZDTV (later TechTV). Recently the user "onetirednumbers" has been uploading many of the episodes to YouTube, and I just couldnt help myself from mirroring this clip. Also, he is criminally undersubscribed, and so if you like this clip please subscribe to him.

OneTiredNumbers' Channel:
http://www.youtube.com/onetirednumbers

All three parts of this program:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0wetQwH9nY
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y82d06KURA4
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MisXHBUjnbo "

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Daniel
• Dennett
• Neurophilosophy
• Consciousness
• Eliminative
• Materialism
• Change
• Blindness
• Cognitive
• Neuroscience
• Big
• Thinkers
• Artificial
• Intelligence
• LennyBound
• mirror

[fishybishbash]

People don't care if their minds are 'boring and finite' as Dennett puts it. What people don't like the idea of is the notion that the universe/ existence is boring and finite. Well, its not boring, not in my experience, anything but and consciousness has everything to do with the way in which we experience and interact with our environment at a psycholgical level. So to intimate that consciousness is mundane and banale strikes me as being at best disingenuous.

[EvolvedAtheist]

@fishybishbash

I would agree that many people don’t care about the facts or the truth. Those are the people who want to imagine themselves to be something wonderful and spectacular. They do this out of an egocentric psychological need to imagine themselves as special.

I suggest that you watch the video again. Dennett is talking about the *processes* that underly our consciousness. He is not saying that the universe is boring (it is finite, however).

[fishybishbash]

@EvolvedAtheist He definitely IS saying that. His standpoint seems to be that any notion of the 'fantastic' in relation to the mechanics of the universe is childish and deluded, to be discouraged. That position is entirely informed by his subjective experience and has only an oblique relationship to the 'facts' and the 'truth', neither of which the scientific community is in full possession of, as you well know. But we're getting there - and the closer we get, the more incredible it becomes.

[EvolvedAtheist]

@fishybishbash

No. You are misinterpreting what he said. You appear to be doing this in light of your own subjective experiences.

If the scientific community is not yet able to fully explain how 10^14, mindless, depolarizing-repolarizing-depo­larizing robots generate *awareness* of the external world, then nobody else possesses an explanation.

The clue lies in complexity. It is complexity that converts mundane processed into the incredible. Fact is more fantastic than simplistic fantasies.

[fishybishbash]

@EvolvedAtheist Well I completely agree with your last point (although I would say that the phenomenon of fantasy is very much a fact!) and also that the relationship between complexity and statistical chance is very hard to grasp and is probably the basis for the physical universe. I admit that my own experience informs my ideas on these matters, also that science is the only chance we have of establishing the truth. Thanks for replying - consciousness eh, makes you think doesn't it...

[EvolvedAtheist]

@fishybishbash

"phenomenon of fantasy ... fact"

As is the phenomenon of concepts, in general. It is amazing how many people muddle conceptualization with physical existence!

The brain is complex, but its complexity is not governed by "statistical chance". Random firing characterizes grand mal epileptic seizures, and they render the person unconscious.

Experience informs all ideas. I think that the trick is to try to dissect out our emotional biases as much as possible ... and think ;)

[fishybishbash]

He doesn't 'explain' consciousness. He can't, the science hasn't reached an explanation of the phenomenon yet. What he's expounding here is his opinion, based on his personal experience (therein lies the rub). His mission appears to be to point out how boring and mundane our mental process is. Dont listen. Be something amazing, spectacular - surreal. You might as well. You're only here the once -

[impowow]

@fishybishbash see a small portion of that painting at any one time in enough detail to really scrutinize it. This small portion of the visual field is called the fovea. The reality is that only a very small part of our visual field is relatively high fidelity. The rest is piecemeal constructions which use a lot more brain power than eye power. Scientists, philosophers and laymen alike will bloat consciousness. This causes a larger explanatory gap in their conception than which really exists.

[EvolvedAtheist]

@fishybishbash

If I understand you correctly, you are expounding an opinion based on your own personal experience and ego-centered biases. Dennett is actually saying that we imagine that our sensory perceptions are more comprehensive than actuality demonstrates. In that, he is correct.

If you are saying that we should make the most of our brief visit, then I agree. However, by definition, we cannot *all* be amazing or spectacular.

[eurisko67]

@vandeha Yes, it's called Natural Selection.