Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
If you replace a couple of chips in your computer, for example, change its memory chips, then this does not mean that the operating system should die. Neurons are just individual building blocks in our brain. What is important is not them individually, but the structures they create. Therefore, if the structure as a whole does not change when replacing a neuron, then it is incorrect to talk about the death of the “old consciousness”. Well, yes, some signals will be processed in a slightly different way from the previous one, but this change is so negligible that the consciousness simply does not notice it. In addition, our consciousness is quite flexible and easily adapts to small changes – the main thing is that you do not immediately replace a decent part of the brain, and replacing individual neurons is normal, our consciousness is designed for this. In general, the very premise of the death of the “old consciousness” raises great doubts about its correctness. Now as for the biorobots: who says they can't have consciousness? If it still doesn't exist, it doesn't mean that it can't exist in principle. Let's move on. Effectiveness. Before using such concepts, we must first define what we understand by them. Efficiency in the abstract sense does not make sense. Efficiency is always tied to some result. So that's what you mean by efficiency? Energy efficiency? Efficiency of settlement of the territory? Reproduction efficiency? What kind of efficiency are we talking about? Finally, the main question is: why did evolution give us consciousness? By the way, are you sure it was evolution? This is not obvious and there are different opinions on this, but come on, why do we need consciousness? The main function of consciousness is the ability to generalize disparate observations into a model of the world and use this model to predict events and make decisions. What we think of as the world around us is actually a model built by our consciousness. Without consciousness, we can only react reflexively to external signals. Consciousness allows us not just to react, but to make a plan of action to achieve the final goal, which is also determined by consciousness. It is consciousness that allows us to create and implement multi-way strategies, giving us a huge competitive advantage over the vast majority, if not all, of living organisms on Earth. This is exactly what we need consciousness for: to gain a competitive advantage, long-term planning based on the built model of the world is used.
Consciousness remembers itself in the past. We do not remember how it really was but how we remember what we remember. Memory of memory. And it plays a cruel joke sometimes, and sometimes on the contrary heals wounds.
I'm sorry, but you wrote this without thinking. Consciousness has given us super-superiority over animals, making us the dominant species. It is the ability to generalize and present what is not there that opens up opportunities for cooperation. The Catholic will understand the Catholic and they will organize a crusade together (although Catholicism is not material), the lawyer will agree with the lawyer that the law exists and create an organization (also not material things), and the businessman will promise pieces of paper with numbers and receive material benefits from another businessman. But you will never convince a monkey that it needs to do something right now that will provide it with an infinite number of bananas in the next life. She just won't be able to figure out why it should be done.
In Stanislav Lem's book Dialogues, for example, there was a concept that the only possible way to transfer consciousness to another medium is to gradually replace neurons individually with an artificial analog until the medium is completely artificial. He proceeded from the fact that the brain is a terribly plastic thing and easily transfers its functionality to its other structures with minor damage.
Well, it's the same with consciousness, it doesn't die, but remains conditionally the same, adjusted for new experience.
The question is eerily incorrect. Evolution does not give anyone anything consciously, greatly simplifying – all robots without consciousness in those unique conditions of the formation of the homo species simply did not survive and did not give offspring, could not compete with those who could think abstractly and solve all sorts of interesting problems. Of course, there is also a variant of biorobots – insects, there are a lot of them on the planet and they are successful, but humans are the first animal species that significantly limited the effect of natural selection on their species and in general are not very dependent on it. Do not underestimate the role of consciousness – this thing helped to survive in the savanna among predators, and then populate the entire planet and dictate its rules to the world – and all this from a clumsy, not the strongest creature in those conditions. In general, I mean – there is an unoccupied ecological niche-speciation begins, all sorts of adaptations appear specific and so on, and then it is all distributed according to the degree of efficiency between species – someone is at the top of the food chain, and someone collects carrion, well, someone disappears altogether. And there are all sorts of effective solutions-from a DNA molecule in a protein shell (a virus) to you and me.
An unconscious human biorobot wouldn't be any more efficient, since it is biologically an extremely frail and unadapted creature. No fangs, no claws, no thick hide, no hard-boned muscles. To survive, a person had to “jump over his head” – create artificial claws and teeth, build homes (and this is not inherent in his instinct), etc. In short, do a lot of things that are simply impossible without the participation of consciousness (based on instincts and conditioned reflexes alone).