Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When you split the brain, do you split the person?

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#51

Post by amelius »

kazagistar wrote: post #49
amelius wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consciousness is not a 'thing', it is a property. But if consciousness is only a property that doesn't influence the actual physics, then how are we even able to talk about consciousness? Why would it occur to physical beings that something like consciousness exists?

Not sure what that question means. An ocean wave is something that emerges from the basic laws of physics, but its not actually a "thing", its just a bunch of water exhibiting a property. The only difference between that and the human mind (and properties of it like consciousness) is the level of complexity and thus completeness of our ability to model it. The mind is a wave in an ocean of brain.

Ok, so by "not a thing" you mean "abstraction", rather than something which does not physically exist.

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#53

Post by SubiculumCode »

kazagistar wrote: post #49
amelius wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consciousness is not a 'thing', it is a property. But if consciousness is only a property that doesn't influence the actual physics, then how are we even able to talk about consciousness? Why would it occur to physical beings that something like consciousness exists?

Not sure what that question means. An ocean wave is something that emerges from the basic laws of physics, but its not actually a "thing", its just a bunch of water exhibiting a property. The only difference between that and the human mind (and properties of it like consciousness) is the level of complexity and thus completeness of our ability to model it. The mind is a wave in an ocean of brain.

A 'bunch of water' and a 'wave' are both vague things. The declaration that one is a thing, and the other is not is disugenous. But let us suppose that what you meant is the water molecule is a thing..but is a water molecule more of a thing than a wave is a thing? I do not think so, for even if you speak of the individual atoms in a water molecule the atom is a collection of other parts, and nevertheless is fundamentally a wave-like distributed field. This insistence that one is a thing and the other simply an abstraction of the mind is hubris and artificial.

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#54

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

chimprich wrote: post #41
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #12

>How does a brain, consisting of many modules, create just one person? The same way a population, consisting of many people, creates just one state? The state is not the people and the people are not the state, yet both exist.

> The state is not the people and the people are not the state, yet both exist. A state does not exist in any physical form. It is entirely a fiction, existing only in the minds of humans. Such existence it does have is not independent of the problem of consciousness so this is not the most helpful comparison.

How so? The state's physical form is comprised of people the way our minds' physical forms are comprised of neurons.

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#55

Post by dpark »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #52
dpark wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one said that complexity is consciousness.

A lot do. E.g. Tononi's IIT.

Let me rephrase. No one here said that complexity is consciousness. In particular, AnIdiotOnTheNet, who you replied to, did not say that complexity is consciousness.

Also, tangentially, New York's sewers aren't that complex compared to even a rat's brain.

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#56

Post by emeraldd »

otakucode wrote: post #42

Dualism is wholly wrong. There is no mind-body split. Even speaking of 'the brain' is just a rough convenience. Individual neurons stretch from that tangled mass of them up in your skull all the way down your spine and to the soles of your feet. Every nerve fiber extends from nearly every point in your body right into your brain. Perception pours in from every point, and it is all extremely important. Emotion, for in…

> Just removing patterned sensory input from a typical person via sensory deprivation quickly results in their consciousness dissolving.

Do you have any basis for this statement?

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#57

Post by klank »

amelius wrote: post #51
kazagistar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what that question means. An ocean wave is something that emerges from the basic laws of physics, but its not actually a "thing", its just a bunch of water exhibiting a property. The only difference between that and the human mind (and properties of it like consciousness) is the level of complexity and thus completeness of our ability to model it. The mind is a wave in an ocean of brain.

Ok, so by "not a thing" you mean "abstraction", rather than something which does not physically exist.

It's a philosophical question about when does something begin to exist vs. it is just an abstraction comprised of constituent parts.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/material-constitution

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#58

Post by liberte82 »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #30
liberte82 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But a state isn't conscious

By what metric do you make that declaration? I submit that any empirical model of consciousness applies equally to states as it does to human minds.

A state doesn't have an independent sense of identity that is apart from the pieces that make it up. That is, it doesn't experience consciousness (as far as we know).

If humans didn't have egos, identities and a sense of "I" and were merely sensory machines, then maybe there could be an equivalence.

That is, if ego and identity are the same thing as consciousness. I'm not sure they are. Frankly, it's a mystery to me, as I think it is to everyone, except for perhaps a few enlightened Buddhist monks.

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#59

Post by hammock »

kazagistar wrote: post #49
amelius wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consciousness is not a 'thing', it is a property. But if consciousness is only a property that doesn't influence the actual physics, then how are we even able to talk about consciousness? Why would it occur to physical beings that something like consciousness exists?

Not sure what that question means. An ocean wave is something that emerges from the basic laws of physics, but its not actually a "thing", its just a bunch of water exhibiting a property. The only difference between that and the human mind (and properties of it like consciousness) is the level of complexity and thus completeness of our ability to model it. The mind is a wave in an ocean of brain.

A wave is a thing. I think what the commenter meant consciousness is a property, like red is a property. Red is not a thing. Things can be red.

Re: When you split the brain, do you split the person?

#60

Post by laythea »

otakucode wrote: post #42

Dualism is wholly wrong. There is no mind-body split. Even speaking of 'the brain' is just a rough convenience. Individual neurons stretch from that tangled mass of them up in your skull all the way down your spine and to the soles of your feet. Every nerve fiber extends from nearly every point in your body right into your brain. Perception pours in from every point, and it is all extremely important. Emotion, for in…

> Just removing patterned sensory input from a typical person via sensory deprivation quickly results in their consciousness dissolving.

What about people born with out sight or hearing or both. Do those individuals not have a conscious?

Post reply on HN