|
Your examples are not particularly great because you are conflating instinct, in the case of the dog, with reflex in the case of the baby. While "somewhat" related, the two notions operate at vastly different scales. Reflexes, in particular are very well understood. But to answer your actual question: I personally find the arguments in favor of consciousness being a post-hoc mechanism fairly convincing, so I'm going to go with "Never". Aramis fucked around with this message at 16:20 on Oct 23, 2020 |
#
¿
Oct 23, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
Izzhov posted:I'm no biologist, so I would love some elaboration on what exactly the difference is between them. For me, intuitively, the dog chasing the ball does feel like it could be called a "reflex," so clearly I'm missing some nuance here. Reflexes are low-level neurological processes that partially or completely bypass the cortex, and typically involve only senses that have nerve endings across the whole body (touch, pain, heat, etc...). You can literally remove most of the brain of a creature and they still function. Instinct is an evolution-driven pre-configurations of the cortex, leading to cognitive behaviors that are inherent to the species, like bird-nesting or hunting behaviors. Removing or damaging the brain "breaks" them. Aramis fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2020 16:29
|
|
|
Cabbages and Kings posted:Godel, Escher, Bach covers a lot of this, too. I was much more warm to that book's view of consciousness than anything loving Sam Harris has to say. Godel, Escher, Bach is an interesting read, but I'm going to throw in a recommendation for Figments of reality: The Evolution of the Curious Mind by Cohen and Stewart as a good layman-friendly introduction to the subject. It doesn't really delve into what consciousness is, but instead mostly explores why consciousness is. It's a much simpler question, but is an important foundation to sit on when tackling the subject. Aramis fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
I hesitate to bring up out-of-date and debunked "science" into the mix, but I think it's interesting, so what the heck. If you start from the predicate that there indeed is a post-natal transition from a purely reflex-driven being into someone who cognitively picks one of multiple alternatives, then it's worth noting that Freud has a strong opinion on the matter in his Psychosexual stages of development. It is pretty much one of the defining feature of the transition form the Oral to the Anal stage, which he places around the 1 year mark. Again, don't read too much into it. It's Freud. Aramis fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2020 18:00
|
|