Science News said:
“It’s not the stuff out of which your brain is made,” Koch says. “It’s what that stuff represents that’s conscious, and that tells us that lots of other systems could be conscious too.”
Now this article is dealing with the fact that science can be "loopie". As in math, where a formula can result in a number, and so that number can represent that formula. Then, that number can also replace a variable in that formula.
Then the article continues explaining how consciousness "has" the same property of being loopie.
Okay with that as a given, in an attempt to prove something, and with those statements composed by the blood ox red text above being assumed, by us, as being true, is the statement in forest green true?
Yeah! Who am I to argue differently with Koch, but I must since I feel there is a contradiction in the above logic.
It seems to me that a part of my consciousness is not only my "self concept", but also knowing what "Who I am." means to me. "Who I am." and its meaning, is certainly tied up in the "What materials comprise me?" which is answered by the statement, "I am made up of flesh and bones, as well as other biological stuff."
If such is rolled up into being a part of my self concept and if consciousness has the property of being loopie, and I say both are true, then how can the statement in the forest green be anywhere near true? Because in fact I do care. And the fact that I caught this error of thinking and realized initially that it was in error, was a result of my caring, having been told that I would be just as satisfied with my self concept if I were made of transistors. As a flesh and blood individual, I would not.
So, how do we fix this? Is the error in the premise:
once again said:
next paragraph said:
Edited by encouraged, 13 February 2012 - 08:20 PM.