all 3 comments

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The basic mental process mechanisms should be worked out before attempting to work out the nature of consciousness in any meaningful scientific way.

The actual nature of storing neural information/memory is still a complete mystery. A basic understanding of the nature of neutral activity is still undefined.

For example:

  • Where is sensory information stored?
  • How is it stored?
  • How is it retrieved?

A crude understanding of any of these questions in the most primitive of animals (insects, arachnids, etc.) would advance the sciences by decades.

Consider that these are creatures that can currently be dissected and experimented on, so the moral obstacles to experimentation don't really exist.

Modern research into consciousness is like trying to discovery how a cell phone works by visually examining it.

I doubt these questions will be answered in the next 50 years. It's currently impossible..

The person(s)/team who acheives this will be immortalized in the Pantheon of scientists.

We are nowhere near solving the mystery of consciousness.

[–]Zombi 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I completely agree. We are nowhere near even understanding the mechanisms within the brain. How can we begin to say that we understand consciousness when we don't even understand the mechanisms that create it? Like you said, it's akin to saying you can build a cellphone because you know what one looks like.

[–]happysmash27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think of consciousness as a strange loop myself, so I don't see why a neural network couldn't be conscious. The computer itself might not be conscious, but the neural network certainly could in my opinion.