Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight” • Hacker News Board

Re: Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight”

#41

Post by redacted » Tue, Sep 29, 2015, 9:29 AM UTC

KingMob wrote: post #29

mirimir wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love it too. Conscious self-awareness is arguably not very useful. It pretends to be in control, but mostly it's just observing what the mind has already done, and makes up stuff to rationalize it. At best, that's merely superfluous. But at worst, consciousness gets in the way, and generates counterproductive emotional states. But fortunately, ones mind can trick its consciousness into being useful :)

This is the epiphenomenal position, that consciousness is just along for the ride. However, it strongly requires that consciousness be not detrimental (at least not overall), because otherwise, evolution probably would have weeded it out. The novel Blindsight kind of suggests that humans are a local evolutionary maxima, that we achieved mastery of our planet due to our other talents, despite being burdened with consc…

> if a mutant human arose without consciousness, presumably it would have an advantage over other humans

The book actually does address this. ROT13 to avoid spoilers:

Vg vf fgebatyl fhttrfgrq gung gur inzcverf bs gur abiry ynpx pbafpvbhfarff, juvpu tnir gurz n fvtavsvpnag nqinagntr bire 'onfryvar' uhznaf gung gurl uhagrq.

Re: Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight”

#42

Post by KingMob » Tue, Sep 29, 2015, 3:15 PM UTC

redacted wrote: post #41

KingMob wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the epiphenomenal position, that consciousness is just along for the ride. However, it strongly requires that consciousness be not detrimental (at least not overall), because otherwise, evolution probably would have weeded it out. The novel Blindsight kind of suggests that humans are a local evolutionary maxima, that we achieved mastery of our planet due to our other talents, despite being burdened with consc…

> if a mutant human arose without consciousness, presumably it would have an advantage over other humans The book actually does address this. ROT13 to avoid spoilers: Vg vf fgebatyl fhttrfgrq gung gur inzcverf bs gur abiry ynpx pbafpvbhfarff, juvpu tnir gurz n fvtavsvpnag nqinagntr bire 'onfryvar' uhznaf gung gurl uhagrq.

It's been a few years since I read it, so I didn't recall that. Is it stated or just implied?

Still, I remain unconvinced of the author's depictions of a lack of consciousness. The problem is the "philosophical zombie". It looks and acts, to all accounts, like a normal human, but has no internal experience. Since I can't even prove anybody else has experience (despite acting a lot like me), what's the basis for different behavior just because an organism lacks consciousness?

I found it intriguing but unlikely, based on evolutionary fitness.

Re: Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight”

#43

Post by mirimir » Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 12:24 AM UTC

redacted wrote: post #41

KingMob wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the epiphenomenal position, that consciousness is just along for the ride. However, it strongly requires that consciousness be not detrimental (at least not overall), because otherwise, evolution probably would have weeded it out. The novel Blindsight kind of suggests that humans are a local evolutionary maxima, that we achieved mastery of our planet due to our other talents, despite being burdened with consc…

> if a mutant human arose without consciousness, presumably it would have an advantage over other humans The book actually does address this. ROT13 to avoid spoilers: Vg vf fgebatyl fhttrfgrq gung gur inzcverf bs gur abiry ynpx pbafpvbhfarff, juvpu tnir gurz n fvtavsvpnag nqinagntr bire 'onfryvar' uhznaf gung gurl uhagrq.

Lrf. Ubjrire, ng gur fgneg bs Rpubcenkvn, V trg gung inzcverf fvzhygnarbhfyl eha frireny ernyvgvrf. Ohg vg'f abg lrg pyrne gb zr jurgure gurl'er nygreangr fpranevbf, whfg sbe nzhfrzrag, be jungrire.

Re: Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight”

#44

Post by mirimir » Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 12:36 AM UTC

KingMob wrote: post #42

redacted wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if a mutant human arose without consciousness, presumably it would have an advantage over other humans The book actually does address this. ROT13 to avoid spoilers: Vg vf fgebatyl fhttrfgrq gung gur inzcverf bs gur abiry ynpx pbafpvbhfarff, juvpu tnir gurz n fvtavsvpnag nqinagntr bire 'onfryvar' uhznaf gung gurl uhagrq.

It's been a few years since I read it, so I didn't recall that. Is it stated or just implied? Still, I remain unconvinced of the author's depictions of a lack of consciousness. The problem is the "philosophical zombie". It looks and acts, to all accounts, like a normal human, but has no internal experience. Since I can't even prove anybody else has experience (despite acting a lot like me), what's the basis for diffe…

Your selection arguments make sense to me. We are conscious, so consciousness must increase fitness. Maybe impulse control is a key aspect of it. And thinking of Hofstadter, maybe it's just the top of the self-referential stack.

Re: Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight”

#45

Post by mirimir » Wed, Sep 30, 2015, 12:40 AM UTC

themgt wrote: post #25

mirimir wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love it too. Conscious self-awareness is arguably not very useful. It pretends to be in control, but mostly it's just observing what the mind has already done, and makes up stuff to rationalize it. At best, that's merely superfluous. But at worst, consciousness gets in the way, and generates counterproductive emotional states. But fortunately, ones mind can trick its consciousness into being useful :)

Worth trying to differentiate between "consciousness", which I think it's obvious cats and many other animals have, and the human "voice inside your head" / narrative self, which is much more a tower of babel built on symbolic cards, which is a very recent human invention, and arguably that moreso than "consciousness" is what can cause us so much harm.

That's a good point. I was thinking of narrative self. And I am conscious of my narrative self, so they're distinct. So arguably they're all levels in a self-referential stack.

Re: Blindsight: Some people who have lost their vision find a “second sight”

#46

Post by KingMob » Fri, Oct 02, 2015, 6:32 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #44

KingMob wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been a few years since I read it, so I didn't recall that. Is it stated or just implied? Still, I remain unconvinced of the author's depictions of a lack of consciousness. The problem is the "philosophical zombie". It looks and acts, to all accounts, like a normal human, but has no internal experience. Since I can't even prove anybody else has experience (despite acting a lot like me), what's the basis for diffe…

Your selection arguments make sense to me. We are conscious, so consciousness must increase fitness. Maybe impulse control is a key aspect of it. And thinking of Hofstadter, maybe it's just the top of the self-referential stack.

Impulse control could be part of it, but it's not clear that that requires consciousness, either :)

We know that perceptual awareness has some connection to biology (sleep, seizures, drugs, etc), so to the extent that consciousness requires energy, it has to justify its caloric expenditure.