I’ll start by acknowledging that this isn’t my idea, credit to Sam Harris. I also don’t know if this is even controversial, but I figured this would be a better place to post than in Showerthoughts.

By consciousness, I mean the subjective experience of what it feels like to be. As philosopher Thomas Nagel put it:

‘An organism has conscious mental states if and only if there is something that it is like to be that organism—something it is like for the organism.’

It’s at least conceivable that things like free will, the self, or even the entire universe could be an illusion. For all we know, we could be living in a simulation and nothing might be real. Even if you don’t believe that, there’s still a greater-than-zero chance you could be wrong. However, this doesn’t apply to consciousness itself. Even if everything is just a hallucination, it remains an undeniable fact that it feels like something to hallucinate. To claim that consciousness could be an illusion is a self-contradictory statement as consciousness is where illusions appear.

  • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Consciousness is as a convenient abstraction to explain the behaviour of human beings, but it doesn’t really refer to anything real. As such, I think that the claim “consciousness is not an illusion” is technically correct but misleading, since it implies that consciousness exists.

    Nagel’s quote is extremely vague, since that ontological “to be” that he uses doesn’t really mean anything.

    Just the two cents of some materialistic nobody.

    • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Consciousness as defined by Nagel absolutely exists. If one want’s to define it differently then that’s fair but it’s not really an argument against the statement made in the title anymore then.

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’m not changing definitions. I’m stating that what he defined does not exist.

        To go a bit deeper: regardless of whatever that “to be” is supposed to mean, the “subjective experience of what it feels like to be” is still an experience. And experiences do not exist in the physical = real = material sense; they’re solely abstractions. Like valence holes, software, or so many other things that are not real but convenient to explain the behaviour of real things.

        The same applies to concepts like “mind”, “soul”, “spirit” and similar.

        [No idea on why people are downvoting your comment though.]

        • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          But the point is not the ‘to be’ part but the ‘feels like’. It’s quite undeniable that what ever this existence is feels like something. It feels like something to be me, it feels like something to be you, it probably feels like something to be a cat but it likely doesn’t feel like anything to be a rock. General anesthesia doesn’t feel like anything. It cannot be experienced. Consciousness is the ability to have experiences.