[MD] Consciousness & Moq.

[David Thomas]

On 8/27/10 12:57 AM, "Krimel" <Krimel at Krimel.com> wrote:

> [Krimel]
> My Chalmers is rusty so I will defer to Dave on subtleties and just take
> what you offer from wiki. There is plenty enough there.

[Dave]
While your Chalmers gears maybe rusty mine are still in the manufacturing
phase. But it is clear that if Chalmers is anywhere close to right Pirsig is
bad wrong in many of his claims.

The first half of the book sets up all the parameters and arguments for and
against all conceivable theories of consciousness. The second half which I
just started is where he start to build his theory in detail. By this time
he describes the two streams of experience as:

Physical>>> Awareness >>>>>>>>>Cognizant
Phenomenal>>>Conscientiousness>>>>>"Key"

Chalmers doesn't yet identify the end state or function, "key" I'm just
using it a placeholder. He describes the relationship of the two streams
this way:

[Chalmer-CM pg 240]
"It seem natural to say that the central correlation between the physical
processing and experience is the coherence between consciousness and
awareness. What gives rise directly to experience is not oscillations or
temporally extended activity or high-quality representation, but the process
of direct availability(of information) for global control. Any more specific
physical state will qualify a a correlate only insofar as it plays a role in
global availability; so the more specific correlations are derivative on the
overarching correlation."

>From this I take that James intuition was partially right that "conscious
experience" is a process, but not of one stream but two and the interaction
between them. But "consciousness", "the state" is a required separate
function, brain state, whatever necessary to make the whole process work.
Or "conscious experience" supervenes "consciousness", it depend on it.

Of course what this does do RMP's social and intellectual levels is obvious.
I earlier said that the dualism occurs at the top of the biological level.
That is not really the case it would occur evolutionary wise somewhen in the
middle. One would expect then the intellect>>>to>>>intellectual and social
levels would also split into parallel physiobiological and consciousness
streams or paths with some but not necessarily complete coherence between
them.

I also said I didn't think Chalmers would buy a moral order at the bottom
two levels. I should have said the physical level. Because morals of some
type probably could emerge after consciousness emerged.

Dave