Alok Jha: Consciousness, the hard problem? - Presentations (1/2)

What is the latest philosophical and scientific thinking in explaining how the wet stuff in our heads creates the world we experience?

An expert panel consisting of Dr Anil Seth, Professor Barry Smith and Professor Chris Frith discuss these questions and more.

This event was held at the Royal Institution on Wednesday 7 March 2012 and forms part of a series curated for the Ri by Alok Jha.

[schmoldovia]

In this video we hear a lot about perception, visualisation, illusion and memory ... but very little about consciousness. Christian Gingras (here in the comments) is right ... and I can add my own experience.
I'm still not recovered from an illness with a TGA. I've been disoriented, I lost memories, I couldn't keep new ones... nevertheless I was me, conscious of myself... therefore I see (self-) consciousness more as a process, in which a percepting structure take the image of itself as something percepted as well as a something percepting. Through this feedback loop the structure will interprete this "as itself". If this repeats, an idea of I, me and myself will be constructed. This needs a complex logical interpretation, why most animals can't realise a reflection in a mirror as themselves.

[TheRoyalInstitution]

Part Two is available on the Ri Channel - see link in video description above

[rizom]

It striking that these gentlemen seem to have never read Bergson. It‘s the same exclusively materialist assumptions that have been framing the questions around consciousness falsley for the last 150 years. To say it in the words of Gilles Deleuze: A problem only finds the answers it deserves. It‘s time to reframe the problem and its underlying assumptions

[modvs]

Getting past the hard problem of mowing my lawn: merely thinking about it won’t get the job done.

[numericalcode]

The analogy with the question of “What is living?” is great. When did we get an answer? Just knowing more about it caused us to stop asking.

[williamburts]

Consciousness is eternity loving and knowing itself.

[davidaemayhew]

Consciousness NOT eating a banana. Eating a banana is eating a banana.

[pontifrancesco]

Not to be rude, but it's clear that this neuroscientist has settled for a little understanding of what the philosophical problem is

[ivanbeshkov]

A more fundamental question seems self. All of us (and all animals too) could have had identical twins born instead of us, and in such case none of us would have existed even if all of us had existed, so to speak, in our identical twins. Elvis Presley was sad that his identical twin died at birth. But had he lived and Elvis had never been born, would there have been an Elvis, even if the twin had been called Elvis and acted exactly as he did? That's the puzzle of self in a nutshell.

[Jalcolm]

My right hand cannot grasp itself. Nor can yours. Therefore for philosophers my right hand has a hard problem. Philosophers cannot be embarrassed. Awareness is self-reflexive. So we can remember what happened and notice our contribution. We don’t have to wear a tuxedo. It’s not such a big deal. It took evolution 3.8 billion years to make the system. Get over it.

[PrestonPittman]

Consciousness is greater than the body of contributing forms of information that supply our Consciousness for the benefit of the whole universe! Yes, the universe just so happens to have "allowed" this human process of Consciousness to even exist on such a tiny orb within Itself (the Universe). Conciousness (when fully recognized to the connection we have with everything in the Universe!

[janpetrykowski]

Does anyone know the signal detection experiment the last speaker mentioned? I'm having trouble locating it.

[SearchBucket]

Alok Jha deserves a larger role (maybe alongside Brian Cox on television?) in the wider world of science presentation although I would hate to lose him from the Guardian's Science Podcast because he "makes" them so enjoyable.
Good luck and thanks for great podcasts Alok :)

[lookatmepleasesir]

how exactly are we unconscious of the vast majority of what is happening right in front of our eyes?

[jeehooahn]

17:30 finally, they talk about something of stubstance

[davidwilkie]

Brain activity is often compared with an Orchestra, where the instruments have sections and timed contributions at different parts of the piece played.., all tuned and timed in one mechanism for producing sound, by a Conductor. Although the different instruments are all tuned to a particular note, everything has a different timbre of fine tuning.
The logic of QM-Time modulation, fine tuned to a degree of precision where the timbre of Standard Model elemental objects is lost in pseudo random uniqueness individualized by the Exclusion Principle.., makes all perceived phenomena a very blunt approximation of the reality of Prime-ary quantization.

Typical example is the 3D+T Geometric interpretation of a Physical existence of apparently separate objects, actually timed to a unique composition of the precise spacing observable, and checked by the best of Science Calculations, in QM-TIMESPACE mathematical precision.

We have relied on the Philosophies (of gross perceptions) for qualitative questions in the simpler, topical observations, but now the logical analysis of the macro universe has revealed mathematical measurement techniques based on these observations, better precision of observations can make better Philosophy.

So "Consciousness is.., what Consciousness does", self-defining Reflection. The reason for "mirror neurons"?

It's a direct consequence of the universally observable Prime e-Pi-i logical function, collectively in the sum of all history, QM-Time, that is equivalent to the self-defining modulation of an eternal Cavity Resonance, topologically quantized qualities here now, in apparent functional integration. "All things are connected".

[intrograted]

I don't think conciousness and conscious awareness are exactly the same thing. You obviously can't have the latter without the former, but the former doesn't necessarily need to always include the latter. Just because I'm not consciously aware of a decision I make, doesn't mean conciousness didn't make that decision.

[kimrunic]

The optical illusions are a question of hardware and nothing to do with consciousness, which is akin to software, to use that analogy.

[jeehooahn]

I feel like i'm listening to a sales pitch, rather than a science talk.

2 minute hype of saying nothing.

Yeah, I get the whole hook thing, align with your audience, establish the importance of your topic, but FFS, who gives a shit about that superficial fluff that's a waste of time?

But everyone needs to pad their resume.

[moiquiregardevideo]

Consciouness is controlled by the layer 3 of the hippocampus. These neurons generate theta waves, around 9 hz, which are synchronization signal for memory neurons all over the brain areas.

Consciousness is defined here as the list of all the perceptions that our brain can distinguish. The philosopher just describe the different type of data that can reside in the conscious mind and pretend that those feeling can not be explained by the brain.
I look at the specification of the new cell phone, the list of app available. I think we can not explain all that with tiny silicon oxide transistors. Where the gps reside? Which chip contain android?

The study of the brain can only make progress if we ask correrct questions. What it is to experience this or that? Concentrate on brain dynamic and ask questions in a logical complexity level.