CONSCIOUSNESS IS TRIVIAL.
Qualia was just a little more difficult. Philosophers and pseudoscientists are just attention whoring on public ignorance.
— “I still don’t understand qualia.” –MS
OK, So, there is a difference between understanding what’s going on and the ability to introspect upon it. For example, lift your right arm over your head. How did that happen? I can explain how that happened as biological processes. But knowing that doesn’t mean you can observe it. I can explain why color vision is organized as it is – correctly mirroring the universe. But that doesn’t mean you can introspect upon it. I can explain how consciousness is bjiologically constructed – but that doesn’t mean you can introspect upon it. So why is that any different from the fact that we can describe magnets and magnetism, chemical composition, or subatomic particles but you can’t directly observe them. So what’s the difference between inability to externally observe and internally observe? THERE ISN”T ANY.
Nerves > Sensation
Neural Micro Columns > Prediction (fragments)
Neural Columns > Composition (identification)
Neural Regions > Disambiguation (valiance)
Hippocampal Region (three corticies) > Integration
Hippocampal Association Regions > (Perception)
Forward Neocortical Regions > (Prediction)
Thalamus > (attention)
Frontal Neocortical Regions > (attention regulation – recursion)
Cerebellum > Muscular Timing
Cingulate Gyrus > Release of Action.
Touch and temperature are simple. The development of the eye (sight) and ear are interesting, particularly the ear (hearing).
How would nerves possibly convert pulse (vibration) and disambiguate it from other nerves by pulse and vibration, and why is it that our touch, sight, and sound is so accurate a reflection of the observable (sensable world)?
In other words, how would those nerves ‘sort’ stimuli into reflecting precisely the vibrations whether physical pressure, air waves, or light waves, into stimuli (qualia) that so accurately reflects the external world? ISn’t that an interesting question?
The correct question is “well, else would our senses accomplish and how would they do so other than what they do?” Turns out it’s pretty simple.
The evolution of increasing sensitivity to the spectrum of vibration and necessity of continuous recursive sortition, would, of course, naturally result in consistency and correspondence with the universe – simply because there is no other information to organize by.
I mean, it’s so stupidly simple it’s ridiculous.
And the reason we can’t cmoprehend it ist hat we think there is an observer called ‘I’, when in fact ‘I’ is just a stream of a hierarchy of memory in real time.
And for the audience, what you consider ‘i’ is a little region in your brain stem that’s regulating homeostasis. That’s it. It’s about as smart as a thermometer. That’s all. Is that humiliatiing? Yeah, well, the earth isn’t the center of the universe either.