Hacker News Reader

Comment by program_whiz | Hacker News Reader

I'm always amazed that this needs to be said, but yes, there are other creatures with consciousness who see from "first-person perspective". Do we imagine that only humans can do that, and every other creature, with their range of similar and not-so-similar brain structures are just automatons that don't have experiences, but instead just produce outputs for a given set of inputs? That's almost as arrogant as thinking that since other people differ in their anatomy and brain structure from you, you're probably the only person who is consciously experiencing life from first-person (everyone else is just a flesh robot).

View on HN

If I weren't a militant solipsist, I would be offended by what you said about my assumptions!

Hey now! The reality that confines a singular, isolated perception can still incidentally offend its sole sentient entity without motive.

You’re being selfishly stoic, and that’s somewhat repugnant, even for a solipsist.

Well now i think that you are being naive:

I believe that humans just produce outputs for a given set of inputs.

But that does not also mean that i don't believe in consciousness. Consciousness is just a part(one many parts) that sits between the input and output.

The article, and the parent comment seek to gain some understanding of consciousness by exploration of subjective perspectives - both our own and that of the bee's. Your statements merely assert that you view consciousness from the outside, 'objective' perspective. How does this contribute to the conversation? Are you saying that subjective perspectives on consciousness do not exist and/or are an illusion? Or that they are irrelevant (maybe b/c you believe free will does not exist)? Or that it's useless to study consciousness from a subjective perspective?

'humans just produce outputs for a given set of inputs' sounds like one of the axioms of the behaviorist school of psychology, which eliminated all concepts of internal states to concentrate solely on stimulus (inputs) and response (outputs). While it has proven useful for the treatment of some kinds of pathological behavior, it has fallen out of favor as a tool to study consciousness - not a big surprise, as the whole enterprise elides the concept of consciousness entirely.

    The article, and the parent comment seek to gain some understanding of consciousness by exploration of subjective perspectives - both our own and that of the bee's. Your statements merely assert that you view consciousness from the outside, 'objective' perspective. How does this contribute to the conversation?

Yes, you do have a good point.

I was mainly just expressing how i thought about the issue, maybe putting some light on other parts of the equation.

    Maybe b/c you believe free will does not exist?

For that you need to define free will. Essentially the free will question comes down to, do you believe in magic, yes or no.

I don't believe in magic and therefore i don't believe in that type of free will.

The only thing that determines how you will react to a certain input is all the pervious input you have had in your life and your genes(aka starting position).

    Or that it's useless to study consciousness from a subjective perspective?

No not useless.

Consciousness is not a total illusion, it is simply not what people seam to think what it is.

My Consciousness seam to think it is a human, but in reality it is a neural network located in a humans head. So one illusion is that consciousness seam to think it is something that it is definitely not.

Do I think it's likely that at least certain other animals have a subjective conscious experience? Yes.

But until we understand why certain processing involves that subjective experience, and thus why other brain processing (as far as we know) does not (for a lot of our own brain processing seems to not involve it), we don't have strong evidence as to what other creatures have a subjective conscious experience and which do not. Though it seems likely, we don't definitely know there are other animals that have a subjective experience.

But everyone, including me, is a flesh robot.

>> That's almost as arrogant as thinking that since other people differ in their anatomy and brain structure from you, you're probably the only person who is consciously experiencing life from first-person (everyone else is just a flesh robot).

Wow, so, because I can’t prove anything exists outside of my own mind, I’m completely ignorant for being a solipsist.

I guess I can make some blanket statement saying everyone who believes what you believe is arrogant and ignorant.

>Wow, so, because I can’t prove anything exists outside of my own mind, I’m completely ignorant for being a solipsist.

Can you prove that your mind exists?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com