Hacker News Reader

Comment by bmh100 | Hacker News Reader

I must disagree. Skepticism, moral epistemology, the origin of reality, etc., are metaphysical concepts. Consciousness, in its various definitions, clearly has physical descriptions and criteria. Once consensus is reached about a definition, it will be much easier to determine the causes and requirements for it. As neuroscience, computer science, and information technology progress, it will eventually become possible to precisely manipulate and/or create/simulate consciousness.

View on HN

> As neuroscience, computer science, and information technology progress, it will eventually become possible to precisely manipulate and/or create/simulate consciousness.

There's a good word which describes that sentence: 'faith'

Or possibly 'extrapolation'. We've seen science explain magic time and again: eg, what was previously an evil spiritual infestation is now a bacterial infection. Think on the analogy, a metaphysical phenomenon became physical (and observed/manipulable). Unless you're a dualist, you buy that the brain (a science-accessible object) equals the mind in a fundamental way (from MRIs, brain damage, etc). Whether it's connected to a separate physical phenomenon yet unobserved, or creates the mind by emergence in a way that's not inductively accessible but only deductively (through information theory and the like, per this article). So yes, 'faith' in science to do what it does best - but 'extrapolation' from prior scientific achievements in explaining magic.

I prefer the term "conjecture based on deductive reasoning." It is reasonable to presume that something is theoretically possible unless we have specific evidence that it is impossible. For example, even though it is impossible today, most people would agree that it's theoretically possible to create self sustaining colonies in other solar systems. "Faith" usually implies less, or even no, basis in reason. If you still feel "faith" is the more appropriate term, please explain your reasoning.

That depends on the definition of consciousness I guess. Of course you could define it in a physical way but that would be something different than what many people mean by consciousness - i.e. that it's my feelings, perceptions, thoughts, etc.

I think that's not quite the whole picture. We also make judgments about the consciousness of others, and those judgments are based at least partially on physical criteria. Think about judgments of consciousness regarding those suspected to be "brain dead" or in vegetative states.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com