Dear George,

I agree with Penrose: awareness is derived from the transitive verb, 'aware': one is aware OF something - or they do not, and clearly this can change at any moment.

Consciousness on the other hand, is always there, inherently whether or not there is currently an object that one is conscious of.

While an interesting question, there is no need for our purpose here to determine conclusively whether one's mind and one's brain are the same, overlapping or totally separate. According to some, the mind is made of some subtler matter, whereas according to others there is no such thing. Either way, no object - gross or subtle, is capable of consciousness (otherwise, plucking a teddy-bear's ear should have been punishable by jail).

.

Dear George,

.

Thank you for sharing the gist of Penrose’s contemplation on consciousness which I, rightly or wrongly, consider an elementary biological function of all life forms.

As Darwin observed, even earth worms have a well-developed sense of consciousness because, based on his close observations, they have to make judgments about the kinds of leafy matter they use to block their tunnels. Plants, shrubs, trees and other vegetation also deploy quite sophisticated strategies with their environment in order to accomplish various vital functions such as pollination, self-defence, and capturing food.

Carnivorous plants are known to trap and feed on insects, spiders, lizards, sow bugs, tadpoles, and frogs, and even small mammals such as rats and rabbits. Although lacking an immune system comparable to animals, plants have developed a stunning array of structural, chemical, and protein-based defences designed to detect invading organisms and stop them before they are able to cause extensive damage.

It is the mechanism that triggers these elementary biological functions that I consider to represent a form of consciousness.

And, unless I am mistaken, the range and sensitivity of consciousness varies from one species to another, from one individual to another, and even varies within the life span of each individual.

In its more sophisticated, cognitive form, consciousness permits the perception of mental states, or so-called “qualia”, such as taste, smell, colour, feeling (the physical sensation) as well as the sense of movement produced when visioning a series of fixed images in rapid sequence – which appears to have permitted the subsequent development of the faculties of imagination and conceptualisation.

It is this perception of movement that we are capable of deriving from a series of static images that, in my opinion, pleads in favour of the hypothesis that, just as there is no “movement” in reality, there is no “mind” in reality that produces thought - simply physical matter.

I have not heard from Peter yet. I had hoped he might have taken a New Year’s resolution to respect his word but still no sign of Godot in 2017 ... not so far !

.

Dear Banjo,

Thanks too for reacting, and Happy New Year to you. There are many definitions of consciousness but I have never heard it defined as “an elementary biological function of all life forms”. It is usually tailor-made to exhibit the quality that distinguishes humans from non-human animals and other life forms.

Penrose, for instance, devotes the whole of his Section 1.12 to a discussion of the terms awareness, understanding, consciousness and intelligence as he understands them. I cannot reproduce the lot here, only quote this (p.39):

“‘(U)nderstanding requires ‘awareness’. Awareness I take to be one aspect - the passive aspect - of the phenomenon of consciousness. Consciousness has an active aspect also, namely the feeling of free will … the passive having to do with sensations (or ‘qualia’) … I take these to be two sides of a single coin.”

In particular, we speak of artificial intelligence (where computers come into play) not artificial consciousness or awareness.

I also remember, from somewhere else, a definition of consciousness as “awareness of being aware”. In this sense aparently non-human animals are aware (of their environment) without being aware of their awareness.

A group of chimpanzees is moving through the forest toward a grove of trees that is now seasonally bearing a favourite fruit. In their consciousness is there intent in their actions? Is there intent in their desire to assuage their hunger, to taste a delicious luxury food while forgoing the easily available more common, though less delicious comestibles along the way? Most importantly, are they aware that their actions are consciously intended? What tests can we apply that will decide the issue?

A housewife walks to the supermarket to buy groceries etc. In the governing context how are her actions different from the chimpanzee?

Atributions of awareness seem to fall glibly from the tongue and IMHO stem more from homocentricity than from a scientific desire for understanding.

Dear Pogi,

A housewife walking to a supermarket may have the impression that her actions are consciously intended.

For a chimpanzee, this seems less likely, but who knows?

Either way, the presence of such impressions tells us nothing about consciousness itself, only about the works of the brain/mind. Attribution of awareness is a mental process (involving memory and analysis) and as such is quite different from awareness itself, so it tells us nothing about the latter.

.

Dear George,

.

Thank you for your kind New Year’s greetings. I wish you and yours a very Happy New Year 2017 too. May all your wishes come true !

You wrote :

« There are many definitions of consciousness but I have never heard it defined as “an elementary biological function of all life forms”. It is usually tailor-made to exhibit the quality that distinguishes humans from non-human animals and other life forms »
.

Your words are sweet music to my ears, George. If, indeed, I have finally managed, after all these years, to have at least one, single, original idea during my lifetime - that is neither stupid nor easily refutable - then I feel that I am not just an umpteenth link in the chain of life that thinks predetermined thoughts it is programmed to think. I shall have also existed as an individual. Cogito ergo sum.

If the idea meets the dual test of originality and validity, it will have testified to the fact that nature has, indeed, endowed me with that more sophisticated, cognitive form of consciousness (than that of the more rudimentary forms of life) which I described in my previous post, and which you indicate some other authors refer to as “awareness of being aware”.

It remains to be seen if it meets the aforementioned dual test. Please feel free to choose your arms and fire away, George. I am a great admirer of your critical mind and perspicacity.

Same goes for anybody else who cares to take aim and fire a few shots. I extend an open invitation to all and sundry to participate in the collective slaughter. The more the merrier !

No offence taken ! No prize given !

.