[ExI] Consciousness as 'brute fact' and meta-skepticism

Ben Zaiboc ben at zaiboc.net
Sat Feb 8 19:12:19 UTC 2020

On 07/02/2020 18:57, Will Steinberg wrote:
> It has always bugged me when otherwise rigorous science-types claim 
> that consciousness JUST IS.

Well, before you start explaining something, you need to define it. How 
do we define consciousness? Is there an accepted definition? 'Awareness' 
seems to be the most common one, but that seems fairly simple to 
explain, in terms of information in systems, that allows them to react 
to their environment and other systems, and even themselves 

Somehow, though, I suspect that won't be enough for some people.

If that's the case, those people need to come up with (and agree on) a 
definition of 'consciousness' that we can use as a starting point for 

Maybe the actual problem here is defining the word in a way that is 
meaningful and amenable to scientific investigation (which brings us 
back to 'Awareness', as far as I can see,  and that's not something that 
'just is', it's something we can already explain).

Any other suggestions?

Ben Zaiboc

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list