Comment by AlbertCory
3 years ago
ok, so anything with our "shared history and similar biology" is assumed to have consciousness?
How similar is "similar"? Is it just mammals, or just certain orders, or can organisms in the other branches be assumed to have consciousness too?
The question of "where is the line" presumes there even is a line between matter ("objects") that expresses or does not express consciousness, which is also a big and unsubstantiated claim that requires proving. Occam's razor (i.e., our standard scientific apparatus of null vs alternative hypotheses) would seem to indicate it is appropriate to assume there is no difference in kind, only difference in degree, until there is evidence to prove otherwise.
No need to define it or prove it. Just assume it.
What reason do you have to do so? What purpose would doing that serve?
As it stands you are just suggesting complicated, untestable theories. The point above is, that is ultimately pointless.
The simplest possible argument goes as follows: I am conscious, and I am made of matter. Everything else that is real is made of matter. There are other minds out there who also have this experience. With no further information, I must assume as the null hypothesis that everything in reality is conscious. An alternative hypothesis may be presented, but it would then need to be proven using reproducible studies and real evidence before we can assume the alternative hypothesis and reject the null hypothesis, per the consensus definition of formalized "science".
The rebuttal along epistemological lines goes as follows: you can know you are conscious, but you cannot necessarily know things that are witnessed through physical (limited, imperfect) sensory organs, so there is a wall beyond which we are forced only to postulate truths rather than conclusively prove them.
And the response to that is: if we are to progress in our analysis at all, we must postulate certain truths, and it is "best" to postulate only the least complex (in the Kolmogorov sense) assumptions given the data (Occam's Razor). "Best" is defined according to humanity's scientific principles.
6 replies →
I think that unless you have proof otherwise we should assume all organisms have awareness of their surroundings. Otherwise you’re just doing the same thing religious people did for centuries and treating humans as ultra special.
The least like us, the less likely, obviously. Animals with very similar neurology almost certainly experience something very similar to ours.
How similar? Good question. Assume nothing and truth will out.