Key points from the conversation:
1. Firstly it is fascinating that a bunch of neurons sitting in a vat of fluid can absorb incoherent signals from the 5 senses and navigate the world - that is just a wonder to behold!
2️. The brain can be thought of as an inference engine. That is it carries with it templates of how the world works, makes sense of the new data coming in and makes "predictions" of the world works and directs the body accordingly. Probability statistics-wise this is termed Bayesian.
3️. But not really! A car that is self-driving might operate in this Baysian way. But our brains have beliefs and egos as well that defy probabilistic behavior. Meaning, that inspite of evidence to the contrary, we might behave according to previously held beliefs (anti-vax!!)
4️. Really - the job of the brain is to keep the body alive! Here the brain does not know the liver is in such and such position, the lung is in such and such position etc, like we do. But the brain knows through chemical interactions how they should be working and is occupied by keeping this very complex body alive (heart beating, lung breathing, antibodies, and on and on).
5️. Memories are not the way we think memories are. That is it is NOT an MP3 or MOV file stored in our head like a audio or video file on the computer. Rather it is "some relevant data" that is fit into a story or narrative. This how the brains saves space and operates.
An example of this is eye witnesses in court cases. The more an eye witness is asked to repeat what they saw, the less reliable it becomes (and more story gets coherent if not accurate!)
6️. Dreams have a specific function that is statistical. During the day, we absorb the data and get it into a "best fit" in terms of how the world works. ("I need to do this to get a pay raise", "I should not touch a hot stove" etc).
However, the best fit may not be the best fit. Meaning it might not be the full or real situation.
Dreams are a way of pushing back on what we do when we are awake, and create new patterns with the same data. That is why dreams are connected to what we have experienced, but rearranged in seemingly strange ways.
And that is also why we wake up in the morning with solutions to problems that vexed us when we were awake. It is probably because the sleeping brain is reworking the data to fit it in new schemes.
7️. But what about conscience, consciousness, soul etc? Here scientists, mathematicians, neuroscientists etc are dividing the problem into two parts. The hard problem and the (relatively) easy problem.
The hard problem is the mysterious subjective experience. For example why do I experience red as red? Why am I, I? And other such intractable subjective problems.
The (relatively) easy problem is, how can we study the brain and how it works and can we replicate it and predict its behavior. Which we can work through scientific methods and indeed are working on.
The hope is that we chip away at the question and accumulate small answers that hopefully build up to the ability to answer the "hard" question.
8️. Are mind and matter different?
Here the argument is that the mind is "of the body" and not separate from it. The body is full of chemical and electrical processes from which comes the brains operations. If you are building a system, where do you cut off the physical process and where do you start the mental process - a very hard line to draw
9️. Is "emergence" real? Meaning does our identity "emerge" out of how the neurons are firing?
For example: Is a flock of birds forming a pattern that is different than each bird an emergent phenomenon. Are brains like that?
The problem with this is that the flock is a wonderful pattern but unlike our minds, the pattern of the flock does not direct the birds. Whereas our brains can and do direct our bodies and actions. Therefore the flock of birds situation is considered "soft emergence" and the brain is considered a "hard emergence" outcome
10. Can brains only be replicated in carbon based living systems or can then be created in artificial systems?
How about a hybrid? How about I command a robot through a virtual reality system. And let us say that the robot flies to mars and I experience Mars through the robot in virtual reality. Is the robot experiencing it or am I?
---
What I gather from this conversation is that the community of scientists
and mathematicians have classified the overall problem discussed here into two components: hard problem and the (relatively) easy problem. So scientists are happy to swim in the easy space and allow the philosophers to swim in the hard space.
By thus sidestepping the intractable problem of subjective experience, we can say to the philosophers, as Thomas Harris once said in his ‘70s best selling book: “I’m OK, You’re OK.”
Overall, this was a fascinating and rigorous conversation that I really enjoyed; indeed, am enjoying this whole podcast series.
Link to the podcast:
https://podcasts.apple.com/il/podcast/anil-seth-on-emergence-information-and-consciousness/id1406534739?i=1000538209792
No comments:
Post a Comment