I think, therefore I think you think I am by Sophia Magnusdottir

Sofia,

I wish to add that fear of the other, as in a predator, is not possible without self-awareness. The mirror test is far too high of a bar for this simple and important function.

Best of luck with the contest,

Jeff

Dear Dr. Sophia Magnusdottir,

Please excuse me for I have no intention of disparaging in any way any part of your essay.

I merely wish to point out that "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) Physicist & Nobel Laureate.

Only nature could produce a reality so simple, a single cell amoeba could deal with it.

The real Universe must consist only of one unified visible infinite physical surface occurring in one infinite dimension, that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

A more detailed explanation of natural reality can be found in my essay, SCORE ONE FOR SIMPLICITY. I do hope that you will read my essay and perhaps comment on its merit.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Nice essay Dr Sophia Magnusdottir,

Your ideas and thinking are excellent like,

1.... The definition should also enable us to answer following three representative questions:

Q1) Is an anesthetized person safely out so that they do not experience pain?

Q2) Is a person with locked-in syndrome self-aware and/or aware of their situation?

Q3) Has an artificial intelligence developed consciousness comparable to that of animals?

2. "What is consciousness?" We are products of Darwinian evolution. 'Survival of the fittest' is commonly interpreted as an adaptive selection of actions beneficial for reproduction. But this pays too little attention to the question what it takes to develop these reactions.

3. Rocks rarely change internal states, hence cannot create models of their environment, at least not in the typical lifetime of solar systems.

A Good proposal , I fully agree with you............

..................... At this point I want you to ask you to please have a look at my essay, where ...............reproduction of Galaxies in the Universe is described. Dynamic Universe Model is another mathematical model for Universe. Its mathematics show that the movement of masses will be having a purpose or goal, Different Galaxies will be born and die (quench) etc...just have a look at my essay... "Distances, Locations, Ages and Reproduction of Galaxies in our Dynamic Universe" where UGF (Universal Gravitational force) acting on each and every mass, will create a direction and purpose of movement.....

I think intension is inherited from Universe itself to all Biological systems

For your information Dynamic Universe model is totally based on experimental results. Here in Dynamic Universe Model Space is Space and time is time in cosmology level or in any level. In the classical general relativity, space and time are convertible in to each other.

Many papers and books on Dynamic Universe Model were published by the author on unsolved problems of present day Physics, for example 'Absolute Rest frame of reference is not necessary' (1994) , 'Multiple bending of light ray can create many images for one Galaxy: in our dynamic universe', About "SITA" simulations, 'Missing mass in Galaxy is NOT required', "New mathematics tensors without Differential and Integral equations", "Information, Reality and Relics of Cosmic Microwave Background", "Dynamic Universe Model explains the Discrepancies of Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry Observations.", in 2015 'Explaining Formation of Astronomical Jets Using Dynamic Universe Model, 'Explaining Pioneer anomaly', 'Explaining Near luminal velocities in Astronomical jets', 'Observation of super luminal neutrinos', 'Process of quenching in Galaxies due to formation of hole at the center of Galaxy, as its central densemass dries up', "Dynamic Universe Model Predicts the Trajectory of New Horizons Satellite Going to Pluto" etc., are some more papers from the Dynamic Universe model. Four Books also were published. Book1 shows Dynamic Universe Model is singularity free and body to collision free, Book 2, and Book 3 are explanation of equations of Dynamic Universe model. Book 4 deals about prediction and finding of Blue shifted Galaxies in the universe.

With axioms like... No Isotropy; No Homogeneity; No Space-time continuum; Non-uniform density of matter(Universe is lumpy); No singularities; No collisions between bodies; No Blackholes; No warm holes; No Bigbang; No repulsion between distant Galaxies; Non-empty Universe; No imaginary or negative time axis; No imaginary X, Y, Z axes; No differential and Integral Equations mathematically; No General Relativity and Model does not reduce to General Relativity on any condition; No Creation of matter like Bigbang or steady-state models; No many mini Bigbangs; No Missing Mass; No Dark matter; No Dark energy; No Bigbang generated CMB detected; No Multi-verses etc.

Many predictions of Dynamic Universe Model came true, like Blue shifted Galaxies and no dark matter. Dynamic Universe Model gave many results otherwise difficult to explain

Have a look at my essay on Dynamic Universe Model and its blog also where all my books and papers are available for free downloading...

http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.in/

Best wishes to your essay.

For your blessings please................

=snp. gupta

Sofia -

Your essay is certainly thought-provoking, and your writing just makes me happy. As to the topic, I'm not sure about your approach... but it's way more sensible than most things I've read about so-called consciousness, including Tononi and Tegmark.

I fully agree that it makes no sense to describe consciousness apart from its connection to the world. One of the themes of my essay, in fact, is that human minds can't be understood apart from their connection with other human minds. As kids, for example, we build up our self-models mainly in relating to others who already have a highly evolved sense of who they are. You very rightly say, "consciousness is relational."

There are two things in your essay I'd really like you to clarify. One is your third level of non-predictive self-modeling. Can you give me an example of what that refers to? Do you conceive this as specifically human? I couldn't tell.

The other one is your statement that "that consciousness is extendable". I can imagine some things that might mean, but it's not clear to me what you have in mind.

It definitely makes sense to say "Consciousness isn't binary but continuous"... though I'm less sure about quantifying it by "the fidelity of the morphisms." I think a lot more is going on than modeling... but it might well be that the richness / accuracy of our mental models is a good indicator of our level of conscious connection with the world.

I guess the most basic question I have about your 4-part structure is whether it makes sense to put non-predictive modeling first, and then predictive. It seems that the kinds of modeling / learning that we see even in bacteria are implicitly predictive - that is, we living things build models in the first place based on our needs and anticipations.

Playing with my one-year old granddaughter, for example, I was struck by her alertness to other people's intentions. She seemed to see right away what I was trying to do, at a given moment, much more clearly than she saw any other aspect of the environment. Even her exploration of toys was mainly focused on finding out what she could do with them. So the world she's modeling is mainly a world of possibilities, more than facts.

In any case, thanks for an essay that was really fun to read and think through.

Conrad

Dear prof. Magnudottir

Allow me to start this critical comment with the assertion that most probably, there will only be free will in so far as the consciousness of the bearer will remain inapproachable by any mechanistic, mathematical approach which by definition stays indifferent to human pain. This I consider as closer to the truth even if "we, the humans" are nothing but mere robots, yet others in the universe's future or past may perhaps stand closer to it.

As a matter fact, one can only provide evidence starting not from a strictly scientist approach but taking also into account all human literature which contains a mostly critical substance, that of the inner emotional life of human beings. A mostly serious reason, seems to be the impossibility to even define a human being without taking into account not just the fear of others but mostly, the fear of the ocean of darkness and death surrounding any human life. It suffices to take a close look at the writings of people like Camus or Cioran(a specialist in death in his own time) to get a better grasp of this simple truth.

That said, I shall here recall the famous Marx's quote on freedom being first defined inside a realm of necessity which, despite its original meaning can be elevated even if at an individual level, which is at the level of a chess player. It is only in that primary and somewhat 'militant' level one can argue of plans and predictions for what are plans without predictions and corrections of a course? So then, given such a serviant attitude of any such militant player, we understand that no true freedom of choice is genuine if not coming outside of 'this world' leaving only one place which is in fact inner and hence irreducible. It is in this inner non-'topos' where imagination and dreams serve to recompose the world as another dreamed reality and so ask for the transformation of the exterior either in piecefull or in violent ways. This only allows the bearer of some consciousness to withstand the stresses of his own biologically inherited reward-penalty system without which no volitional attributes would be ever possible (severe depression suffices to provide proof of that) and at the same time rearm this same system towards goals that are not to be derived from the mere exteriority of any given datum. One must here, attribute this realization partly to the words of Giordano Brunno who was the first to declare that our mind contains more than the universe.

It is then confrontation with the phenomenal immovable exteriority rather than just mere planning that allows for this inner residue to flourish, making possible for us "who are into the night, to come into the day." But any genuine freedom if at all, can only be exausted in the choice of an invented instead of instilled purpose as a means to signify an otherwise meaningless universe.

Dear Prof. Magnudottir,

I would like to recommend the work of Louis Kauffman, found here: homepages.math.uic.edu/~kauffman/

Prof. Kauffman et al have worked out some informal and formal mathematics that support the idea of consciousness as a self (and other) modeling process.

Dear Sophia,

I was pleased to see not just memory, but modeling, in your account. This reminds me of the predictive coding work, and Karl Friston (et al) with their theories in cognitive science. I'm particularly pleased by your hierarchy here of levels of prediction; experience as predicting not just the world, but our own internal responses to it.

We talk a lot about consciousness and awareness in terms of self-reference (e.g., the ability to point to terms in our own mind) but I had not seen it done for self-prediction. I'm in the middle of Andy Clark's new book on prediction and we'll see if he gets there too.

Yours,

Simon

Dear Sofia,

I have enjoyed reading your thought-provoking and very well-written essay.

In my way of looking at things (which could be wrong), I would make a distinction between mind (with its thoughts) on the one hand, and consciousness on the other [in the human context].

The thinking mind derives itself from the physiological functionality of the underlying brain, and is aware of the flow of time.

On the other hand, for me, consciousness refers to a [hard to define] self-aware state, which is not associated just with the brain, but with the whole body as such. It can be felt but cannot be pinpointed to. Consciousness transcends mind and thinking, and is a state in which there is no perceived flow of time.

You probably disagree with the above, but I wonder what you think of the mind versus consciousness divide, and how does it fit in your scheme of things as laid out in your essay.

Thanks and regards,

Tejinder

Dear Sophia Magnusdottir

I like how you were located the problem of consciousness.

I agree also with you that the true question is the level of consciousness not only "consciousness yes or no".

You write that it is difficult to determine existence of consciousness around us. I agree, but we should also be aware that sense of objective material world around us cannot be easily determined. Namely, what we imagine as objective material world (bunch of atoms around us) are only almost empty space and forces between particles. What is stuff from which particles are built, is unknown.

What you think about free-will? Some scientists think that it does not exist.

I have a different solution of this problem. This is panpsychism and quantum consciousness, where free-will is what is a cause of quantum uncertainty. I claim that free-will is the basic thing which is obvious for consciousness. One classical computer (example for p-zombie) works only according to some software, thus according to some logical gates, or according to some classical random generator, which also works according to some logical gates. But quantum uncertainty does not agree with any logical gates.

More in my essay and in my other links.

Best regards, Janko Kokošar

Sophia,

I think you've reached your goal. Great essay, beautifully written. I also support Daniel Dennett's views which seem consistent with yours, and both with mine. Do you agree with his views?

I'm giving yours a high score as I think it's underrated, though here among mainly physicists philosophy is still far too often eschewed. You don't seem to have engaged, which is a shame as learning is a 2 way street, but I do hope you'll get to read and comment on mine.

Best wishes

Peter

Dear Sirs!

Physics of Descartes, which existed prior to the physics of Newton returned as the New Cartesian Physic and promises to be a theory of everything. To tell you this good news I use «spam».

New Cartesian Physic based on the identity of space and matter. It showed that the formula of mass-energy equivalence comes from the pressure of the Universe, the flow of force which on the corpuscle is equal to the product of Planck's constant to the speed of light.

New Cartesian Physic has great potential for understanding the world. To show it, I ventured to give "materialistic explanations of the paranormal and supernatural" is the title of my essay.

Visit my essay, you will find there the New Cartesian Physic and make a short entry: "I believe that space is a matter" I will answer you in return. Can put me 1.

Sincerely,

Dizhechko Boris