Nature of : thinking about two possibilities and their consequences.
We know that we are conscious (at least I am), but we do not know if we HAVE to be conscious (to behave as we do behave).

1. possibility: humans HAVE to be conscious (to behave as we do behave).
-> inference 1: consciousness affects behavior.
-> inference 2: selective pressure affects consciousness, thus it is evolved.
-> inference 3: a philosophical zombie would be distinguishable from a normal person.

2. possibility: humans DON'T have to be conscious (to behave as we do behave).
-> inference 1: consciousness doesn't affect behavior.
-> inference 2: selective pressure doesn't affect consciousness, thus it didn't evolve.
-> inference 3: a philosophical zombie would be indistinguishable from a normal person.

Other two possibilities: consciousness is either fundamental or emergent.

Consciousness compass:
- If it affects behavior (causal) and is fundamental -> physics (e.g. gravity).
- If it affects behavior (causal) and is emergent -> strong emergence (e.g. ??).
- If it doesn't affect behavior (noncausal) and is fundamental -> astral (e.g. soul).
- If it doesn't affect behavior (noncausal) and is emergent -> abstract (e.g. temperature).

Show thread

Which do you think is?

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.