>>11253866We actually don’t know that. The leading theory of consciousness is IIT and even that suggests a kind of panpsychism.
Until someone can explain, in detail, the mechanism in which brain signaling gives rise to any kind of experience/feeling/subjective experience, then no one can make claims about what consciousness is.
Yes we can have correlates of consciousness, but still that doesn’t shed light on consciousness. We don’t say the transistors and computer code make a computer run, it’s the electricity.
I know people will jump at the chance to prove my seemingly air-headed response wrong, but the thing is: you can’t.
We have no idea about how neuron-neuron connections, no matter how complex, can give rise to a thing feeling or experiencing.
If anyone can give me a hint on the mechanism in which this happens, I would love to hear it. I’m serious.
I’m going to laugh at people who say “the hard question of consciousness doesn’t exist” and “dur evolution” or “dur consciousness is selected because it’s efficient. Those are all likely true, but I’m asking for the mechanism.
If you cop out with a quantum reason, then you’re just as pseudoscientific as me with my brain candy panpsychism.
