Here is one thing I have been thinking about for a while…
Gary North’s argument against intrinsic value applied to #consciousness.
Gary North argues, “Value is not something that exists independently in an object or a thing, but rather it is a transjective property of the relationship between things. In other words, value is not something that can be measured or quantified, but rather it is a product of the interaction between the object and the person who values it.” Put slightly differently, value exists in the relationship between things not intrinsically in the things themselves.
Well what if…
Consciousness is similarly not something that exists independently in an object or a thing, but rather it’s a transjective property of the relationship between things. In other words, consciousness is not something that can be measured or quantified, but rather it’s a product of the interaction between the object and the person (not necessarily human) that recognizes that thing as conscious. So like Gary North’s argument against intrinsic value, consciousness would also only exist in the relationship between things not intrinsically in the things themselves.
Does it matter if the relationships are between cells or circuits? My bet is that the relationship is what’s truly fundamental to realizing consciousness.
Curious to hear thoughts on this idea? It would have some interesting implications for #AI…🤔
nostr:npub1q6frc5ds7pqc8sxevmjd8d2skzul7gnrh29v25jhlxsxlwt7h2yskcmm47 nostr:npub1qrujrm3jkhajksflts69ul9p2hcxr88rwka7uy57yg358k6v863q3wwnup
The next question might be: what is the nature(s) of the transjective relationship between network nodes, flesh or otherwise, that constitutes consciousness? Can one be absolutely ungrateful and conscious, or does consciousness require a modicum of a sense of enough—physically, emotionally, relationally?
I often think we define consciousness too narrowly. Perhaps it’s really as simple as preferring one state of reality over another. It could be possible that we need a Copernican shift in how we view consciousness itself. Maybe it’s more like decentralized, nested and firewalled networks. What if being ungrateful or “evil” is really a network connection issue, not being able to connect to enough nodes. This more broad definition would also mean an atom wanting another electron could be viewed as simple form consciousness and a human being wanting a healthy family could be viewed as a more complex form consciousness, however that same atom wanting an extra electron could be part of the network of relationships that give rise to human consciousness that wants a healthy family.
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
