Say, let’s admit consciousness is the result of a physical process.

Then say this process only goes “forward” when our time coordinate increases. Just like an egg gets cooked when it’s temperature coordinate increases, but it doesn’t get more or less cooked when it’s temperature coordinate decreases.

This would mean that going back in time doesn’t result in any perceptible change, since your consciousness hasn’t evolved from it’s “former” state.

Thus making it possible for us to be travelling through plenty of dimensions in varied directions, only ever experiencing the brief times when you happen to be moving in increasing time. Or whatever combination of movement along varied dimensions makes it possible for you to be conscious.

TLDR: i need to take shorter showers

  • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Science is done by observing, theorizing, predicting and then testing. We cannot test anything on consciousness.

    • ageedizzle@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      How do we know that certain wavelengths of light produce certain visual experiences (the colour red, green etc)? How do we know that electrical stimulation to certain parts of the brain can cause certain experiences (such as the hallucination of sounds or smells etc.)? That’s because we test on consciousness indirectly all the time, through first-person reports. So to say that we cannot test any hypothesis related to consciousness is demonstrably false.

      • CannonFodder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Not really. We know that a human can detect those frequencies and output information related to them. Like any transducer. Like any computer. We cannot know what the experience is. The best we can do is describe our own experience, and compare the description to that which other people give, but that’s not really better evidence than what we’d get from a current llm ai which can do the same. It’s logical to assume other people have conscious, but we cannot test it empirically.

        • ageedizzle@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          This is not unique to the science of consciousness. Extreme scepticism can kill any science from the get-go. Sure, we can’t prove that other beings are conscious. But we also can’t prove that the external world exists, either. Does that mean we’re doing to stop doing physics? No, because some forms of extreme scepticism are simply unreasonable. If we wait around for solutions to these radical sceptical scenarios then we’re never going to get anywhere.