3 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2023
      • 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
  2. Aug 2023