Dennett's predecessor brings it all together

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mentat
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Dennett's materialist philosophy of mind, while unique, is not without historical precedent, particularly from David Hume, whose ideas on consciousness are relevant to contemporary discussions. Hume's concepts of "impressions" and "ideas" illustrate that subjective experiences can be traced back to objective phenomena, challenging the notion of a distinct "self" beyond these experiences. He argues that the comprehension of impressions is moot, as they inherently appear as they do without alternative interpretations. The ongoing debate highlights the complexities of linking neural processes to subjective experiences, with some arguing that the "hard problem" of consciousness may not hold weight if experiences are merely a product of ongoing neural activity. Ultimately, the conversation underscores the need for clarity in understanding both the binding problem and the nature of subjective experiences.
  • #91
It can be interesting to look to: digital versus analogue.
Digital can never give all the fine-tuning of the analogue world.
Dennett only looks to the digital aspects.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Originally posted by pelastration
It can be interesting to look to: digital versus analogue.
Digital can never give all the fine-tuning of the analogue world.
Dennett only looks to the digital aspects.

Pelastration, could you document that assertion about Dennett? I've read a number of his books and never saw any such limitation.
 
  • #93
Interesting. Neural science on BBC.
While looking to a hand moving (ie. take a coin, shooting a gun) on a movie ... the brain zone controlling ' the sense of touch' is also activated.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/programmes/sci_act.shtml

direct link to download the realone file: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/ram/sia.ram
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #94
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Pelastration, could you document that assertion about Dennett? I've read a number of his books and never saw any such limitation.
Thanks selfAdjoint,

It was not coming directly from him but: http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge82.html

Quote: "Experimental psychologist Steven Pinker speaks of "a new understanding that the human mind is a remarkably complex processor of information." To Pinker, our minds are "organs of computation." To philosopher Daniel C. Dennett, "the basic idea of computation, as formulated by the mathematicians John von Neumann and Alan Turing, is in a class by itself as a breakthrough idea." Dennett asks us to think about the idea that what we have in our heads is software, "a virtual machine, in the same way that a word processor is a virtual machine." Pinker and Dennett are talking about our mental life in terms of the idea of computation, not simply proposing the digital computer as a metaphor for the mind. Other scientists disagree (See below: "Is Life Analog or Digital" by Freeman Dyson), but most recognize that these are big questions." end quote.

I maybe over-interpreted. ;-). But I don't like Dennett. So ...

Now that page gives a discussion on digital vs analogue, and Smolin makes this nice remark: "So while the holographic principle says that no observer in the universe can access more than a finite amount of information, that information may be stored in a way that cannot be represented digitally by any computer that could be built inside the universe."
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
16K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
38
Views
10K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
13K
Replies
66
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K