You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Silver_Swift comments on Shawn Mikula on Brain Preservation Protocols and Extensions - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: oge 29 April 2015 02:47AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (33)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Silver_Swift 30 April 2015 12:28:29PM *  0 points [-]

To add my own highly anecdotal evidence: my experience is that most people with a background in computer science or physics have no active model of how consciousness maps to brains, but when prodded they indeed usually come up with some form of functionalism*.

My own position is that I'm highly confused by consciousness in general, but I'm leaning slightly towards substance dualism, I have a background in computer science.

*: Though note that quite a few of these people simultaneously believe that it is fundamentally impossible to do accurate natural language parsing with a turing machine, so their position might not be completely thought through.

Comment author: dxu 30 April 2015 03:49:05PM *  3 points [-]

I'm leaning slightly towards substance dualism

This seems a bit like trying to fix a problem by applying a patch that causes a lot more problems. The stunning success of naturalistic explanations so far in predicting the universe (plus Occam's Razor) alone would enough to convince me that consciousness is a naturalistic process (and, in fact, they were what convinced me, plus a few other caveats). I'd assign maybe 95% probability to this conclusion. Still, I'd be interested in hearing what led you to your conclusion. Could you expand in more detail?