Does MWI Adequately Address the Hard Problem of Consciousness?

  • Thread starter Blue Scallop
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Hard Mwi
In summary, the conversation discusses the hard problem of consciousness and how it relates to the many-worlds interpretation (MWI). The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining how and why we have qualia or phenomenal experiences. MWI assumes the brain is classical and that the observer will "split" into multiple versions when observing the double slit experiment. The conversation also mentions the need for serious references or support for this statement about MWI. The thread has been closed until such support can be provided.
  • #1
Blue Scallop
290
17
Did you notice MWI assumes the brain is classical and when we watched the double slit, "that observer will "split" as well--one version of him for each way the double slit experiment came out."

MWI assumes the so called easy problems only. Before I proceed. Please read short paragraph of :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

"The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining how and why we have qualia or phenomenal experiences—how sensations acquire characteristics, such as colors and tastes.[1] David Chalmers, who introduced the term "hard problem" of consciousness,[2] contrasts this with the "easy problems" of explaining the ability to discriminate, integrate information, report mental states, focus attention, etc. Easy problems are easy because all that is required for their solution is to specify a mechanism that can perform the function. That is, their proposed solutions, regardless of how complex or poorly understood they may be, can be entirely consistent with the modern materialistic conception of natural phenomena. Chalmers claims that the problem of experience is distinct from this set, and he argues that the problem of experience will "persist even when the performance of all the relevant functions is explained".[3]"

Here is a logical question.

If the Hard Problem will involve a new field.. like the conscious field. In MWI, will your brain and the conscious field split as well when you watch the double slit experiment? Or will it turn MWI into say Consistent Histories where the conscious field guide the histories?

All right. I need papers or references regarding this. I didn't start this thread for us to speculate which is against forums rule. I mentioned all this just to ask what physicists have discussed this and what they say. It's important as MWI assume the Soft Problem. You need to take into account the Hard Problem too.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Blue Scallop said:
Did you notice MWI assumes the brain is classical and when we watched the double slit, "that observer will "split" as well--one version of him for each way the double slit experiment came out."
This thread has been closed.

Can you provide any sort of serious (peer-reviewed or mainstream textbook) support for that statement about MWI?
If you or someone else can, PM me or any other mentor with the reference, and we can reopen the thread. But until then the thread is closed, as it is not at all clear that it is based on a solid premise.
 

Related to Does MWI Adequately Address the Hard Problem of Consciousness?

1. What is the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI)?

The Many-Worlds Interpretation is a theory in quantum mechanics that proposes the existence of multiple parallel universes, each one representing a different outcome of a quantum measurement. This interpretation suggests that every possible outcome of a measurement actually occurs, but in separate and non-communicating parallel universes.

2. How does MWI attempt to solve the Hard Problem of consciousness?

The Hard Problem of consciousness refers to the mystery of how and why subjective experiences arise from physical brain processes. MWI attempts to solve this problem by proposing that consciousness is a fundamental aspect of reality, and is not limited to the physical brain. In the many-worlds view, consciousness is an inherent part of the quantum universe and is not solely reliant on the brain.

3. Is there any evidence to support MWI?

Currently, there is no direct evidence to support the Many-Worlds Interpretation. However, MWI is a valid interpretation of quantum mechanics and is consistent with all known experimental data. It is also supported by some physicists and philosophers as a way to make sense of the strange and counterintuitive nature of quantum mechanics.

4. Are there any criticisms of MWI?

There are several criticisms of the Many-Worlds Interpretation. One major criticism is that it is untestable, as it cannot be proven or disproven through experimentation. Additionally, some argue that the theory is unnecessarily complex and adds unnecessary elements to our understanding of the universe. Others also question the idea of infinite parallel universes and the lack of interaction between them.

5. How does MWI relate to other interpretations of quantum mechanics?

MWI is just one of many interpretations of quantum mechanics. Other popular interpretations include the Copenhagen interpretation, the pilot-wave theory, and the many-minds interpretation. Each interpretation attempts to explain the same experimental data in different ways and has its own strengths and weaknesses. MWI is unique in its proposal of multiple parallel universes and its potential solution to the Hard Problem of consciousness.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
6
Replies
198
Views
11K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
105
Views
4K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
Back
Top