Consciousness

What makes a person themselves? Is this consciousness separate from all personality and behavioral traits? I.e. if a person's "consciousness" could be moved from one carrier to another, would any traits survive the transfer, or would they essentially be a new person? And finally, is there any possibility of such a transfer ever happening?

>please no spiritual shit, looking for ideas with at least a little bit of plausible basis. Thank you for answers.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hUW7n_h7MvQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

How could you ever conceivably test this by modern means?

The integrated information theory is pretty much the best explanation we have right now for consciousness.

As I understand it, if a physical system of inputs and outputs is sufficiently complex and integrated, a consciousness naturally arises. However, the system must be very causally connected, meaning my consciousness is distinct from your consciousness and just because two people think very alike it doesn't create a consciousness between them or merge their consciousnesses.

Also, you can't not be conscious. There's no such thing as inexperience, because you cannot experience that which is not experiencable, so in a way consciousness is the "default mode" of reality. It's the always-on window into existence that never turns off even if your current physical self dies because there is literally no alternative.

In regards to transferring consciousness, there's just not enough information right now to tell what would happen or how to go about doing so. There have been people who have lost portions or even an entire hemisphere of their brain and gone on living (consciously), but it's hard to extrapolate much from that.

>What makes a person themselves?
their unique biology, history and location.
>would any traits survive the transfer, or would they essentially be a new person?
well if you change the biology but preserve their history and location, then only the biology would change, no?

what do you mean by "new person?"
you aren't the same person that started this silly thread, your history and biology have changed since then....

give it up Veeky Forums

Consciousness is transferrable. I'm transferring a part of mine to yours as you are reading this.

Because ignorance is the root cause of dukkha...

"From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications... comes consciousness. From consciousness... name-&-form. From name-&-form... the six sense media. From the six sense media... contact. From contact... feeling. From feeling...craving. From craving... clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance... becoming. From becoming... birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering.
...when it ceases, so too must dukkha cease

"Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering."

— SN 12.2

It's simpler than we've been making it.

Yes, if your memory and peronality traits were transferred elsewhere, it would still be you, because consciousness is everywhere at once. The locality of consciousness is an illusion created by the locality of memory and identity.

>consciousness
>please no spiritual shit

is like saying

>What makes a solution react? Is this reaction separate from the characteristics of the solution?
>please no chemistry shit

Science is simply not equipped to process this concept, nor should it be

>please no spiritual shit
I thought this was supposed to be a consciousness/psychology thread?

That's some silly shit right there. Consciousness arises from our minds. Neurology is pathetically young and the question cannot be answered scientifically right now, but yes it fucking should be in some number of decades.

Spiritual shit = souls, not consciousness.

>Also, you can't not be conscious.
You don't sleep, how are you still alive?

>consciousness is the "default mode" of reality
Atoms and electrons are conscious?

The qualitative, subjective nature of the subject of consciousness, or the psyche, is no different than calling it the brain's soul.

>>consciousness is the "default mode" of reality
>Atoms and electrons are conscious?
You haven't heard that one before? Not that I support that shit, but some people do actually claim that. My favorite is the theory that all particles have some proto-consciousness and when they are brought together they form intelligence - as if planets, suns, and black holes are ultra-consciousness.

>some people
What people?

cool response senpai, can I have a good source for that? curious to read more

>Atoms and electrons are conscious?

Most neuroscientists are proposing that this isnin fact the case. But there is some hard scientific evidence to support this. A micro scale irona bar has been shown to be capable of rudimentary "decision-making". Anyway, it would explain some macroorganisms that may seem downright robotic and soulless (think of something like a worm) but which nevertheless have brains, and thus probably also a "low level" of consciousness. Even though, at first glance, this makes it look as though consciousness in conscious entities is a kind of gradient, what it actually shows is that consciousness is in all things.

>You don't sleep, how are you still alive?
"you" die every time you go to sleep and a new person having all your memories and genital warts is born when you wake up.

Most? Show me see some white papers and neuroscience experiments to that point, if its supported by most of them.

Protip: Neuroscience doesn't even like the term consciousness preferring cognition or perception, quit calling the dozen or so panpsychism hacks most neuroscientists.

That is pretty impressive, it means you remember every single detail of yesterday and your genitals since you started the day with of all your memories and warts from the previous day, when I can't even remember where I put my keys because every time I rest, I end up in a lucid dream while the space around me folds into a new dimension and I wake in a new one where all my friends and possessions have been replaced by nearly identical copies.

I propose that all consciousness is the same basic thing.... that it is conditioned into certain patterns and responses by our biological, environmental, and personal experiences. It is this conditioning that gives us our personality (bearing in mind that this is a two way exchange - our consciousness also shapes our experience).
This will not be a hard science thread, but for evidence, think about the last time you experienced something with another person or people that was new for everyone involved. Did everyone's consciousness behave in very similar ways?
go do a puzzle with someone. If you both focus, you will pretty much be the same person while your working on it

I partially agree, sleep is a constant sampling of death, which would explain dreaming as a sample of other, less stable, unrealized possibilities

You'll die many times in dreams, you always wake up, even if you're still dreaming

I came here to say this

Its can be a pretty fatal mistake to assume everyone around you has your mindset.

>think about the last time you experienced something with another person or people that was new for everyone involved. Did everyone's consciousness behave in very similar ways?
No, they noticed things and had differing opinions and extra insights that added to my knowledge which I wouldn't have otherwise had if we didn't talk about, I could only trick myself into thinking otherwise if I had very poor communications and interpersonal skills and didn't bother to discover the nuances of someone else or value my own opinion.

>go do a puzzle with someone. If you both focus, you will pretty much be the same person while your working on it
No, you will be two people sitting across from each other trying to do a puzzle and not interfere with the other person.

>he doesn't give all the white pieces with clown shoes on them to his gf because she's working on that part while she gives him all the pieces with monkeys to assemble
>he doesn't have a gf to fix his clown shoes

me again
your not gonna disprove my point any more than I can prove it... but anyhow
any different insights or opinions can be chalked up to conditioning. The puzzle example is not perfect but it makes the point. Individual conditioning would still come into play, but we would share much of the same conditioning (e.g. basic spatial recognition evolved by members of the same species) . Because we would be involved in very similar tasks, using much, shared conditioned problem solving responses, our experiences would be very similar. If your saying they wouldn't be, there's no point in arguing.

Well go to Africa and try to do some puzzle with Mbutu in Click Click Smack and see if your theory holds up.

Just because you do so many puzzles with your mom that you feel like a women doesn't mean your analogy makes any sense to other people who are not you or you mother, if I tried to do a puzzle with someone who didn't want to get all the corner and side pieces done first, I would break their nose with a palm strike. otherwise I would get the outline done to show minimal effort, then start messing with my phone until the other people finished the rest because puzzle are for special needs and the geriatric.

>Well go to Africa and try to do some puzzle with Mbutu in Click Click Smack and see if your theory holds up.

the funny thing is that it would.
>doesn't mean your analogy makes any sense to other people who are not you or you mother
chances are that this user is not my mother. . its ok, I'm the same way when I'm angry. We're the same when we're angry. Same consciousness spirit brother. can we get some sleep now?

You know you told your mom to post that and if you were me, you would know I am disgusted by your naivety, anger would be useless, its like screaming at a puppy covered in its own shit, I just wish you would clean yourself up because I just woke up, its barely light out and don't want to deal with your mess, kiddo.

you wake up like this? wow, goodnight angry brother

Magic probably. I'm not even kidding

You are disgusting in the morning, afternoon, and night, you will be just as naive when I go to bed in about 20 hours as you were for that entire stretch and I will be stuck pondering how much it must cost the tax payers to keep people like you alive instead of falling asleep promptly.

>you will be just as naive when I go to bed in about 20 hours
Are you an adult? Dat sleep schedule.

>I will be stuck pondering how much it must cost the tax payers to keep people like you alive instead of falling asleep promptly.
You need a therapist.

Yes that is why I work all day and have multiple responsibilities.

Does your welfare cover the happy pills they give you that make you compulsively reference them like a cult member, too?

this thread

consciousness is overrated.

youtube.com/watch?v=hUW7n_h7MvQ

I'm way too stoned for this.

The soul supercedes

I dont now, but is right over my left eye.

Some of the most renowned neuroscientists certainly subscribe to panpsychism. Christoph Koch for example. So there's that.