• for: hard problem of consciousness - sensory motor theory, explanatory gap

• for: kariotic flow

• summary

  • While I appreciate the general idea, the explanation in terms of the 6 parts of the kariotic flow wheel is not clear. I found a strong salience mismatch

  • concrete examples would go a long way to bridge the explanatory gap between the salience landscape of the author and that of the reader

• for: explanatory gap

• comment

• insight
  • there is very little research on the role of language in the explanatory gap of the hard problem of consciousness

• for: nonduality, non-duality, duality, dualism, hard problem of consciousness, explanatory gap, relativistic theory of consciousness, human INTERbeing, human INTERbeCOMing, Deep Humanity, DH
• title: A Relativistic Theory of Consciousness
• author: Nir Lahav, Zahariah A. Neemeh

• date: May 12, 2022

• abstract

  • In recent decades, the scientific study of consciousness has significantly increased our understanding of this elusive phenomenon.
  • Yet, despite critical development in our understanding of the functional side of consciousness, we still lack a fundamental theory regarding its phenomenal aspect.
  • There is an “explanatory gap” between
    • our scientific knowledge of functional consciousness and
    • its “subjective,” phenomenal aspects,
  • referred to as the “hard problem” of consciousness.
  • The phenomenal aspect of consciousness is the first-person answer to “what it’s like” question, and
    • it has thus far proved recalcitrant to direct scientific investigation.
  • Naturalistic dualists argue that it is composed of a primitive, private, non-reductive element of reality that is independent from the functional and physical aspects of consciousness.
  • Illusionists, on the other hand, argue that it is merely a cognitive illusion, and that all that exists are ultimately physical, non-phenomenal properties.
  • We contend that both the dualist and illusionist positions are flawed because they tacitly assume consciousness to be an absolute property that doesn’t depend on the observer.
  • We develop a conceptual and a mathematical argument for a relativistic theory of consciousness in which
    • a system either has or doesn’t have phenomenal consciousness with respect to some observer.
  • Phenomenal consciousness is neither private nor delusional, just relativistic.
    • In the frame of reference of the cognitive system, it will be observable (first-person perspective) and
    • in other frame of reference it will not (third-person perspective).
  • These two cognitive frames of reference are both correct,
    • just as in the case of
      • an observer that claims to be at rest
      • while another will claim that the observer has constant velocity.
  • Given that consciousness is a relativistic phenomenon, neither observer position can be privileged,
    • as they both describe the same underlying reality.
  • Based on relativistic phenomena in physics
    • we developed a mathematical formalization for consciousness which bridges the explanatory gap and dissolves the hard problem.
  • Given that the first-person cognitive frame of reference also offers legitimate observations on consciousness,
    • we conclude by arguing that philosophers can usefully contribute to the science of consciousness by collaborating with neuroscientists to explore the neural basis of phenomenal structures.

• comment

  • This is a promising approach to solving the hard problem of consciosness

Białek, Michał, Ethan Andrew Meyers, Patricia Arriaga, Damian Harateh, and Arkadiusz Urbanek. ‘COVID-19 Vaccine Sceptics Are Persuaded by pro-Vaccine Expert Consensus Messaging’. PsyArXiv, 14 January 2022. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/kgsy3.

Schraff, D. (2020). Political trust during the Covid-19 pandemic: Rally around the flag or lockdown effects? [Preprint]. SocArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/pu47c

Maarten van Smeden on Twitter: “Let’s talk about the ‘risk factors’ for COVID-19 for a moment 1/n” / Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved July 11, 2020, from https://twitter.com/maartenvsmeden/status/1249702560442785794

Darren L Dahly, PhD on Twitter: “Share this with whoever needs to hear it: ‘risk factors’, even strong ones that are robustly identified, are almost never useful for making actionable predictions, especially when considered in isolation. TLDR: [Big OR] does not equal [Good, Useful, or Easy Decision]” / Twitter. (n.d.). Twitter. Retrieved July 11, 2020, from https://twitter.com/statsepi/status/1249680569463721984

Shmueli, G. (2010). To Explain or to Predict? Statistical Science, 25(3), 289–310.

Although simple and something that should not come as a surprise to most who are familiar with any kind of Christian religion, this is not only another good example of Origen's system of interpretation but also a good summary to how Wisdom, or Jesus must be understood as the Word of God.

A reference to September 11, 2001, when Al-Queda terrorists flew two hi-jacked commercial planes into the World Trade Center Buildings in New York City.

A reference to September 11, 2001, when Al-Queda terrorists flew two hi-jacked commercial planes into the World Trade Center Buildings in New York City.

Buying up bills of exchange for less than their declared value with the intent to sell them later at a profit, or else holding on to them until paid; discount-broking.

I'm going to annotate caul.