I have stated my thoughts quite clearly, but allow me to do it again:
Your entire hypothesis is bunk, and you need to jump through hoops to make it work while it also immediately fails using any other example. I know you feel smart because you think philosophy matters. Which it does, but only until it runs into actual Science. You have no argument to support whatever point you are trying to make and now you default to consistent personal attacks and fart smelling because you cannot reliably justify your position.
Is that clear enough for you or am I still “proving myself cowardly to state my thoughts”? Do you have any follow up questions to make it more clear to you?
Sure! What exactly do you think consciousness is (or is not)? You seem to think that I was motivated to enter this conversation in order to feel smart, but asked my original question because I was genuinely interested in your point of view.
Even if it is an illusion created by the brain, does that make it any less existent?
Yes. Or in other words:
If you see a mirage of a spring in the desert can you quench your thirst?
That better for you?
What exactly do you think consciousness is (or is not)?
Evidence suggests that “consciousness” is the mechanism that allows separate parts of the brain to communicate with other parts of the brain and coordinate activities. The hypothesis is this is done by the frontal cortex which is responsible for reasoning, decision making, and controlling voluntary movements. However, there is still much research required in Neurosciences before we have a solid theory and understanding of consciousness.
Evidence suggests that “consciousness” is the mechanism that allows separate parts of the brain to communicate with other parts of the brain and coordinate activities. The hypothesis is this is done by the frontal cortex which is responsible for reasoning, decision making, and controlling voluntary movements. However, there is still much research required in Neurosciences before we have a solid theory and understanding of consciousness.
So in other words… it exists.
It is worth nothing that the first sentence is exactly my perspective, as I explicitly stated earlier:
I think that consciousness in the brain is just an approach that it uses to aggregate and share information amongst several subcomponents.
If your brain creates the illusion of a unicorn, then the presence of the illusion is real, even if the unicorn is not.
Whatever you say buddy.
It is very telling that you are unable to respond directly to what I said. 😀
Yes it is. But not the way you think.
Once again, you prove yourself too cowardly to state your thought outright. 😉
I have stated my thoughts quite clearly, but allow me to do it again:
Your entire hypothesis is bunk, and you need to jump through hoops to make it work while it also immediately fails using any other example. I know you feel smart because you think philosophy matters. Which it does, but only until it runs into actual Science. You have no argument to support whatever point you are trying to make and now you default to consistent personal attacks and fart smelling because you cannot reliably justify your position.
Is that clear enough for you or am I still “proving myself cowardly to state my thoughts”? Do you have any follow up questions to make it more clear to you?
Sure! What exactly do you think consciousness is (or is not)? You seem to think that I was motivated to enter this conversation in order to feel smart, but asked my original question because I was genuinely interested in your point of view.
Yes. Or in other words:
That better for you?
Evidence suggests that “consciousness” is the mechanism that allows separate parts of the brain to communicate with other parts of the brain and coordinate activities. The hypothesis is this is done by the frontal cortex which is responsible for reasoning, decision making, and controlling voluntary movements. However, there is still much research required in Neurosciences before we have a solid theory and understanding of consciousness.
So in other words… it exists.
It is worth nothing that the first sentence is exactly my perspective, as I explicitly stated earlier: