What is the best theory of consciousness, /sci/?

dualism. dual aspect/neutral monism is just a version of dualism

reducive mterialism

File: 220px-Nietzsche1882.jpg (14KB, 220x294px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 220x294px

World as will.
From the world as representation.

>>8921340
Neutral monism is not dualism. The core question is what fundamental stuff the mental and the physical are made of. Monism by definition means 1 stuff.

I can agree that dual aspect theory walks a fine line between dualism and monism, because if their "1 kind of stuff" has two completely different sides, it's hard to see it as 1 kind of stuff.

With neutral monism however, it's 1 kind of stuff, that is neither physical nor mental, but a more fundamental kind of neutral matter. Depending on how this neutral matter is grouped together, we either see it as mental or physical.

>>8921144
Idealism with solipsism

File: 1494393308819.jpg (80KB, 553x567px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 553x567px

>>8921144
Mysterianism Praise Kek

>>8921144
Epiphenomenalism

>>8921407
bell's theorem disproves this

>>8921144
Reducive Materialism.

>>8921144
there isn't a theory that satisfactorily explains that fucking shit

>>8921541
So Mysterianism then :^)

>>8921554
>a philosophical position proposing that the hard problem of consciousness cannot be resolved by humans
hasn't been =/= can't

that the universe is a wave and our reality is just the positive matter and there is another universe that takes up the exact same space of our own but is composed of matter with negative mass (which is completely arbitrary for all we know our universe could be made up of matter with negative mass) and life is just matter from another universe and that is why it resists entropy, consciousness is merely a byproduct of that.

File: George_Berkeley.jpg (2MB, 3677x4943px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3677x4943px

>>8921144
Theistic Idealism

File: 1495219320836.jpg (54KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x375px

Which is the one where this is all a dog's dream? I choose that one

File: 1323045753724.png (13KB, 539x462px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 539x462px

>>8922124
I know the one who's about a god's dream.

>>8921144
quantum farts

>>8921144
fuck philosophy, see Koch and Tononi for neuroscience-based approach

>>8922218
Science is part of philosophy, brainlet.

>>8922322
useless philosophy degree detected

whatever Jung says

>>8922348
>t. failed intro to logic

File: IMG_1173.jpg (57KB, 250x392px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 250x392px

The only redpill on consciousness to swallow is that it doesn't matter what consciousness actually is. Great scientists who tout neuroscience will still flinch when their lives are threatened, and great philosophers who tout souls and dualism will still treat their fellow men like shit. The real redpill is living life and making sure that the way you affect others is in their best interest. We'll find out what happens after death ourselves, but what we leave behind is eternal. Every choice and consequence will cascade onto friends, loved ones, children and their children, and so on until the final star cluster explodes.

Just enjoy whatever life is, because you'll never have the answer to this "problem".

>>8922498
This anon gets it. This is the attitude that propelled science to great heights - just enjoy life and fuck trying to solve impossible problems.

there is no consciousness. just a meat computer computing.

>>8922502
*Tips fedora*

I wish science took a more philosophical approach and keep there experiments in the domain of the mind.

What does integrated information theory fall under?

>>8922716
Trash

>>8921144
logical positivism

>>8922570
How the fuck am I gonna get my p value under .05 when my sample size is my brain?

meta cognition that arises from the memories imprinted by our senses and own metacognition

File: CGJung.jpg (17KB, 220x330px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 220x330px

>>8922473

this desu

>>8922498

The practical utility of theoretical knowledge is rarely if ever understood upon its ascertainment. And yet, all knowledge is also equally futile in the midst of a purposeless (meta-)universe.

In other words, I agree; but I also look favorably on those who strive to solve the hard problems. And I expect to be surprised by the fruits of their labor.

>but what we leave behind is eternal. Every choice and consequence will cascade onto friends, loved ones, children and their children, and so on until the final star cluster explodes.
Well you got kind of retarded here, but no matter.

>>8922498
>Just enjoy whatever life is
Part of life is the excitement and joy that comes out of trying to solve mysteries. If knowledge is your driving force, it very much does matter what it is, but not because knowing will necessarily change the nature of living.

>>8922716
It isn't necessarily a theory of what consciousness is, but a theory of how physical systems must be structured for it to give rise to consciousness. Consciousness is then described as a fundamental property of any system.

Not sure exactly what "fundamental" here means; if it's emergent from a high level system, or an intrinsically phenomenal part of matter at the lowest levels. If the former, it could be interpreted as a form of reductive materialism. If not, I guess it would fall into a version of panpsychism/natural dualism.

Framed consciousness with one or multiple component frames that can't point at themselves so for example the question "do I have free will" cannot be answered by the self, successfully because it cannot point to itself. Administrative essence distributes from the elemental construction of integers in sets, to higher elements universally. Control may be the cores dichotomy.

The no theory, because consciousness is basically philosophical mumbo jumbo.

>>8923244
t brainlet

>>8923254
Just atheist. I don't believe in consciousness.
In fact, I am no conscious at all.

>>8922501
>This is the attitude that propelled science to great heights
I think this is the exact opposite of what it does

>>8923271
NPC's don't belong here

>>8921144
There's probably some spoopy shit going on that we don't understand.

>no anomalous monism

brainlet

>>8921144
I actually can explain consciousness in terms of abstractions.

I'm not sure what the name for that is, it is something I independently came up with. My "theory" resolves paradoxes of free will, the mind-body problem, and disproves other explanations of consciousness.

I won't waste time trying to explain it here and arguing with people. I could explain it very fast, but to really explain the argument would take a lot more time. So if you are interested in hearing about it, you'll have to wait until I finish my book, at that point you guys can read it and then be more informed when you start arguing about it.

Posting philosophy threads on /sci/ is against the rules. They belong on >>>/his/.

Please take your masturbatory discussion and leave.

>>8922085
I can't sit here and pretend that this post makes any sense at all

>>8923842
Abstractions depend on functional reduction to explain how they arose. You can't account for the phenomenal aspect this way. You can explain why other people claim to be conscious. but not why it feels like something from the inside to be you.

>>8922498
>anyone asks a major existential question
>"Don't worry about it, just try to be a good person"
I understand what you're saying 100%, but this has never and will never be a satisfactory response to anything. I would much rather aimlessly speculate than dismiss a question entirely, even if there really is no answer

>>8924178
>you'll have to wait until I finish my book, at that point you guys can read it and then be more informed when you start arguing about it.

>>8924272
When is your book coming out?

File: mmm333.png (25KB, 884x648px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 884x648px

>>8921144
this is a pretty good one
>Kerr-Newman, Jung, and the Modified Cosmological Model http://vixra.org/abs/1405.0329
It builds on work in this paper
>Ontological Physics http://vixra.org/abs/1312.0168

>>8924695
Hard to say. Hopefully this summer. If I get into the homeless shelter then I can stop carrying my sleeping bag which is a prohibited item for people trying to go into the public library.

>>8924695
This year.

>>8924701
ebin

simbly ebin

Consciousness is pretty simple: it is an emergent phenomenon due to chemistry. It is the "soul" of the universe and quantum mechanics. And all of it is composed of feedback loops of the environment.

Think of you, your life, and consciousness as a plinko ball falling down and hitting peg after peg, the pegs representing your environment. Your environment is what dictates your life, you are just a big wobbling plinko ball shuffling about through spacetime, and your consciousness is a reflection of the environment that has composed you.

>>8924787
>it is an emergent phenomenon due to chemistry
This sedu.

Same with how computers are able to add numbers. You can only view them as numbers in the context of the computer, otherwise they are just meaningless lumps of atoms.

>>8924787
This explains the functional aspects; why we act how we do and why metaphysical free will is illusory.

It explains none of the phenomenal aspects; why there is a first person observer. If you think it's simple, you haven't understand what the problem with consciousness is.

Chalmers explains it pretty well.
http://consc.net/papers/facing.html

>ctrl+f
>Pribram
>0 results

Ok brainlets,listen up.
Karl Pribram 1951.
Read his work(s).
Thank me later.

>>8921376
this

HAAA. The scientific method has major limitations. It will never reveal to us the origin of consciousness, better yet many other things relating to consciousness.
Look into hinduism, ancient alchemy, and other spiritual things like kriya yoga meditation.
Only you, the consciousness (not the body or mind), can experience what consciousness is. Meditation is the only way to truly figure it out.
This is what gnosis is. Knowledge and wisdom through experience.
Go read the bhuddist heart sutras. Y'all niggas need jesus.

>>8925576
That paper is way too tl;dr. Consciousness will probably never be directly observed because it is an unobservable phenomenon. Maybe it is like another state of matter, maybe it lies outside the the universe and "peeks in" through the window that is our biological brain. Or it is just a culmination of feedback loops, chemistry, magnetic waves, electricity, quantum mechanics and etc. I'd like to think that there is a fundamental aspect of the fabric of spacetime that allows consciousness to emerge.

Physicalism

Physicalism.com