Can somebody please describe, without any robotic assumptions...

Can somebody please describe, without any robotic assumptions, the object present in human perception that leads to the idea of a soul/will/being? I've tried asking this question in a dozen different forms and every time all the responses I get are like something spat out from a machine. People talk about all the ideas that come from it, but I need a perfectly naive description of the object itself without any assumptions to its nature.

Other urls found in this thread:

arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Bump

perception itself, t b h

memes

A high capability of introspection

Why the fyck are we conscious?

There is no place for perception in logic, so why does it clearly occur in reality?

Brainlets who don't want to think about stuff that makes them uncomfortable simply are like "well of course, my perception means I'm a special snowflake, clearly it could only come from some 'soul'!"

a perceptron can do (a form of) perception, ideas are a bit trickier
The idea of having a being and a will is second-nature, a soul is probably ascribing something physical-ish to being alive
So the object would be the self + others

Refusal of the idea of mortality ?

Humans group their perceptions into abstractions. Soul, will and being are such abstractions. For example, certain perceptions of light, soundwaves etc. are abstracted into the concept of "person". But these abstractions are quite arbitrary. Any grouping of perceptory signals can be grouped together. However, certain groupings allow for more efficient thinking, at the cost of introducing errors.

One error that people often make is to believe that these abstractions are objectively real. This is Platonism and leads to, for example, people wondering where the "person" went when someone dies and they attempt to answer this with the concept of a soul, but here they are simply mistaking the map for the territory. The truth is that the "person" never existed, there were signals that you abstracted into the idea of a person, which you are no longer perceiving.

In the same way, every abstraction is merely a grouping of perceptions. What's left to discuss is which groupings lead to the greatest efficiency in thinking and the least errors. Most abstractions we use today are memes inherited from our ancestors. These memes have evolved over generations and are often relics of times when we had an inferior understanding of the world around us. Soul, will, but also life and consciousness are examples of this. Much like the human eye has evolved to an acceptable, yet imperfect form, we should question whether the abstractions that we have been indoctrinated with are an impediment to better thinking.

Because logic doesn't define reality

I'd say it's our way of coming to peace with things we can't understand in an objective sense. A scientific approach has allowed us to understand some of the less complex systems of the universe, but once we get into high complexity systems there are lots of conflicting theories and we find it more satisfying to understand them in an abstract sense rather than defining it discreetly

>the object present in human perception
Can objects exist in human perception? Where exactly are you talking about when you say "in human perception"? Maybe this is why you aren't getting the answers you want because nobody knows exactly what you're trying to ask.

Consciousness is just an emergent property of the ability to do long term planning.
It's all a feedback loop.
>Be animal
>Instinctively plan how close I need to be before I can ambush prey

>Be smarter animal
>Instinctively plan my plans, letting me decide which prey would be the easiest to ambush out of the group of many potential ambushes

>Be smarter animal
>Plan my plans my plans, now I've gone full meta into a feedback loop until I'm thinking about shit that has nothing to do with my ambush because you don't exist in a vacuum and potentially everything is an ambush factor, including being aware that your intelligence is an ambush factor. Enter creativity.

Everything humans do is in at least a roundabout way to increase food, sex, or entertainment.

higher levels consciousness perceives itself as being more and more distinct from the physical body it exists in. one way to explain the separation is through a soul.

dualism

>the object present in human perception that leads to the idea of a soul/will/being

Well, once you have a theory of mind, it's a small step to imagine a mind without a body.

from GEB

In short, an "I" comes about -- in my view, at least -- via a kind of votex whereby patterns in a brain mirror the brains mirroring ofthe world, and eventually mirror themselves, whereupon the vortex of "I" becomes a real, causal entity.

That's just a bunch of random jargon.

wtf theres literally no jargon

here is in brainlet terms:

The soul comes from the brain being a computer which is designed to model the world, and in its modeling of the world, models itself. As its model of the world, and its self improves, it becomes more self aware, and in the case of humans, intelligence allows the investigation of that self awareness.

>Philosophy
>>soul/will/being

>perfectly naive description

Well you could read Descartes

That's not even a description of the object. That's just saying how it arises and nothing about what it is.

empathy maybe?

I think the simple answer to this is that we try to see what's different in us, compared to other lifeforms, just as we try to differentiate life from everything else. We categorize the Universe by applying abstracted filters onto its elements. Even though they have no actual latch to reality they make sense to us, so we stick with it. That's why we think we have a soul/will/whatever, because there's "life" "less complex" than us that don't have this "thing" we "clearly have"... or something.

Consciousness is simply a side effect of the evolutionary need for a decision-making survival machine.

He's basically saying that "I" is just a thought. So I guess if you want to literally define it, it would be electrical impulses whizzing around certain neurons in your head.

The soul is the limited human's attempt to internalize the infinity of the world the human perceives

What proof is there that this object is inside of your body? It could be somewhere far away and your brain is simply a long distance transmitter to a planet far away with the real mechanism of consciousness, and even if we found that place we could never know if that place was simply transmitting somewhere else to another dimension of existence that we don't have access to.

I am a believer in science, but there are some things we need to admit science can never explain. Consciousness is one of them. There is no proof that can be presented that any other person experiences an equivalent form of consciousness, although I personally accept this conclusion. It is impossible to prove this; there is no known basic unit of consciousness that can be observed and known for certain to contain consciousness.

The statement that consciousness is an emergent phenomenon can not be proven because we can't observe consciousness, like saying that a river emerges from lots of raindrops, we can observe the raindrops, then observe the river, we can observe brain cells and brain patterns, but we can't observe consciousness because we are conscious and are only observing the world from one direction, we cant turn around and observe the source. Many people fail to make a distinction between consciousness and human behavior and external appearance of consciousness. These people I can only conclude are not as conscious as people who admit that this can not be known for certain, otherwise they would never make such an obvious mistake.

I think consciousness is external to the brain, some people have it, others don't. The key feature I attribute to conscious individuals is the ability to layer levels of abstraction onto any field of study, to realize that there is no end to the levels of abstraction which can be imposed on reality, and to describe a feeling of observing reality through as though from a great depth, or far away.

Here ya go, an exception in the laws of information and physics that let's a soul be plausible.

The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine
arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159

ps It's actually a great read.

how it arises and what it is are the same thing, thats the point. It would require knowledge of something deeper than soul, to fully understand what it is. Essentially, perception involves some property of reality we can't yet understand. Thats all. Not even that complex or mystical or anything.

there is a difference between "science probably isn't capable of solving this anytime soon" and "science will never determine anything about this"

Once we learn how to create consciousness, we'll be much closer to understanding it. If we are unable to create consciousness this century then theres a good chance that duality is true, and also some elements of religion. (The *only* way this would be possible is if some intelligent agent "grants" consciousness to beings created through its own mechanisms. if that doesn't sound fucking stupid to you idk why you're on this board)