Timothy O'Connor - What’s the Stuff of Mind and Brain?
Summary
TLDR视频脚本探讨了意识的本质,提出了两种截然不同的观点:一种认为所有心智活动完全基于大脑的物理活动,另一种则认为存在某种精神或灵魂的二元论。讨论者提出了一种“软二元论”的观点,认为虽然我们的意识体验依赖于大脑的适当功能,但这些体验本身并不是物理状态的简单复制。他们认为意识体验是大脑状态的因果产物,但具有不同于物理属性的属性,即所谓的感受质。这种观点试图在物理主义和二元论之间找到一个中间立场,强调了意识体验在自然世界中的因果统一性和独特性。
Takeaways
- 🧠 意识的本质是对话的核心议题,Tim博士通过神经生理学研究探索意识和大脑电活动之间的关系。
- 🧬 存在两种对立的意识理论:一种认为所有心理现象都基于大脑的物质活动,另一种认为存在某种非物质的灵魂或精神。
- 🤔 Tim提出了一种“软二元论”,认为意识可能既依赖于大脑的物质状态,又具有非物质的特性。
- 🔬 科学上,人们通常认为人的思想和体验完全依赖于大脑的功能,但大脑的复杂活动是否完全等同于我们的心理生活仍是一个开放问题。
- 🏌️♂️ 历史上的哲学家,如柏拉图,将心灵视为控制身体的非物质实体,但现代科学认为这种观点与实际不符。
- 🤯 意识的产生与大脑的特定功能紧密相关,例如,大脑受到损伤可能导致意识丧失。
- 🔄 意识体验与大脑的物理状态密切相关,但可能存在一种“质的”(qualia)体验,这种体验是主观的,无法仅通过物理状态来完全描述。
- 🔮 未来神经科学可能能够通过监测大脑活动来预测人的思考和感受,但这不意味着能够完全理解意识体验的本质。
- 💭 意识体验可能是大脑正确配置时产生的效果,但它们本身并不等同于任何物理状态,而是物理状态的因果产物。
- 🤲 意识体验具有因果效应,可以影响物理世界,例如,渴望喝水的想法可能导致实际伸手去拿水杯的动作。
- 🌐 这种观点认为,尽管意识体验在物理上完全依赖于大脑,但它们在性质上与物理状态是不同的,代表了一种属性二元论。
Q & A
提姆博士的博士研究领域是什么?
-提姆博士的博士研究领域是神经生理学,专注于大脑的电生理活动,探索人类意识和意识状态的本质。
在提姆博士看来,关于意识的两种截然不同的观点是什么?
-一种是物质主义观点,认为所有心智活动都基于大脑;另一种是二元论观点,认为存在某种灵魂或精神的非物质实体。
提姆博士提到的“软二元论”是什么意思?
-软二元论是一种介于物质主义和传统二元论之间的观点,它认为意识体验虽然依赖于大脑的物理状态,但它们本身并不是物理状态。
为什么提姆博士认为传统的二元论观点在当代知识体系下显得不合理?
-因为现代科学已经证明,我们的思考和意识状态与大脑的功能紧密相关,例如大脑受到损伤时,我们的意识会受到影响甚至消失。
提姆博士如何看待大脑与意识体验之间的关系?
-他认为大脑的特定配置能够产生我们的意识体验,但这些体验本身并不是物理状态,而是物理状态的因果产物。
提姆博士提到的“质的属性”(qualia)是什么?
-质的属性指的是主观体验的特性,例如看到颜色、尝到味道时的个人感受,这些是内在的、主观的现象。
为什么提姆博士认为意识体验不能完全归结为大脑的物理状态?
-因为意识体验具有独特的主观性,这种主观性与物理状态紧密相关,但它们在本质上是不同的,不能简单地等同。
提姆博士如何看待意识体验对大脑状态的影响?
-他认为意识体验不仅是大脑状态的产物,也能反过来影响大脑状态,例如我们想要喝水的欲望可以导致我们伸手去拿水杯的物理动作。
提姆博士提到的“属性二元论”(property dualism)是什么意思?
-属性二元论认为,尽管意识体验在物理上依赖于大脑的复杂状态,但它们在属性上与物理状态不同,具有自己独特的属性。
提姆博士认为属性二元论与物质主义相比有哪些优势?
-属性二元论提供了一个统一的自然世界视角,其中意识体验是现实的一部分,并且具有自己的影响力,这与物质主义认为意识体验仅仅是大脑状态的副产品的观点不同。
提姆博士如何看待意识体验的因果关系?
-他认为意识体验虽然完全依赖于大脑的适当功能,但它们在因果上与大脑状态是不同的,意识体验是大脑状态的结果,但具有自己的存在和影响力。
Outlines
🧠 大脑与意识的探索
这段视频脚本讲述了Tim对意识本质的长期迷恋,他通过神经生理学的博士研究,探索大脑的电生理活动,试图理解人类意识和意识的来源。他提出了两种对立的观点:一种是所有心理活动都基于大脑的物质活动;另一种是存在某种二元论,即不朽的灵魂或精神。Tim倾向于一种软二元论,即意识体验可能不仅仅是大脑的物理状态,而是大脑状态的一种产物,但具有其独特的属性。他强调了我们对意识体验的主观感受,认为这些体验与大脑的物理活动紧密相连,但又不完全相同。
🌟 意识体验与物理状态的区分
在第二段中,Tim进一步探讨了意识体验与大脑物理状态之间的关系。他认为,尽管我们的意识体验在因果上完全依赖于大脑的正确运作,但这些体验本身并不等同于任何物理状态。他提出了一种称为属性二元论的观点,即存在两种基本属性:物理属性和心理属性。物理属性是复杂且有结构的,而心理属性,如体验的色彩和味道,是根本不同的属性。Tim认为,尽管心理属性完全由物理状态引起,但它们具有独立的存在,并且能够影响物理状态,从而反驳了心理状态仅仅是大脑状态的副产品的论点。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡意识
💡神经生理学
💡物质主义
💡二元论
💡软二元论
💡物理属性
💡心理属性
💡表征
💡质的
💡因果关系
💡表征现象
💡属性二元论
Highlights
Tim博士对意识的本质进行了深入研究,探讨了人类意识和大脑电生理活动之间的关系。
存在两种截然不同的观点:一是所有心智活动都基于大脑,二是存在某种二元论,即精神或灵魂。
提出了一种“软二元论”的观点,即意识可能是一种大脑复杂状态的产物,但并非完全等同于物理状态。
我们的思想和体验与大脑的功能紧密相关,但意识状态的本质可能超出了大脑活动的物理描述。
历史上人们曾认为身体像机器一样被心灵控制,心灵是意识的中心,拥有自己的属性。
现代知识认为柏拉图关于心灵的观点似乎不可信,因为大脑的特定功能方式控制着我们是否能够思考。
大脑的某些部分负责不同的感官和思考模式,表明我们感知的统一性可能是一个幻觉。
提出了一种中间观点,即大脑在适当配置下产生意识体验,但这些体验本身并非物理状态。
未来神经科学家可能能够通过复杂计算机监测大脑活动来预测人的思考和感受。
意识体验的主观性质(所谓的感受质)是与物理现象紧密相连的,但似乎有其独特性。
提出了一种观点,即意识体验是大脑状态的因果产物,但它们本身并非物理状态。
讨论了意识体验是否具有因果特性,即它们是否能够影响大脑状态并引发物理事件。
提出了一种观点,即意识状态可能是大脑状态的副产品,但这种观点存在问题。
如果意识状态是大脑状态的产物,并且具有独立存在,那么它们可能能够反过来影响大脑状态。
提出了属性二元论的观点,即意识体验是物理属性之外的另一种属性,它们是由物理状态引起的。
这种观点认为自然世界在因果上是统一的,但意识体验赋予了自然世界新的意义。
属性二元论提供了一种解释,即我们的思考和体验对事物的发展有根本性的影响。
Transcripts
Tim I've been obsessed with the nature
of Consciousness my entire life so much
so that I did my doctorate in
neurophysiology the electrical activity
of the brain searching for what is it
about the human mind that that makes us
conscious and aware of things uh and it
seems like there are two radically
different views one is that everything
that is mental is entirely based on the
brain most brain scientists my
associates think that way the other of
course that there's some dualism and IM
mortal Soul some kind of spirit thing
you've talked about something that seems
like a hybrid kind of a a soft
dualism how can that
work so we know about ourselves human
beings that our thoughts our our
experiences everything about our mental
life that we uh value so highly is deep
dependent on the functioning of our
brain we know that uh but then the
question is well what what are the
nature of those States um that depend on
the brain is is everything that goes on
in US mentally speaking just without
remainder the activity highly complex
activity of nested structures in our
brain electrophysical activity or is
there something
extra historically people have thought
you've got two basic options you could
just say human beings are material
through and through
uh they just are living organisms and
their their minds just are their brains
and nervous systems functioning in the
right environment the other view says no
the body is like a machine that our mind
controls our mind is something else it's
our soul our our it's the center of
Consciousness it has its own properties
just like our body has distinctive
there's a ghost in our machine there's a
ghost in the machine uh and but that
ghost is the the thing that has all the
it's it's the real me and it's the thing
that interacts with my body as Plato
said going all the way back in Western
philosophy uh like a uh the captain of a
ship the ship being the body and you've
got this Captain is the the minded
reality uh Plato's conception of the
mind just seems deeply implausible on
contemporary knowledge it's not just
that I need my brain to function in
order to think the particular ways the
brain functions in very subtle ways
control whether or not I think at all
right uh you somebody hits me over the
head with a baseball bat I cease to be
conscious right there's no no conscious
thought whatsoever let's assume I I I
survive this but for a period of time
I'm unconscious it would seem like on
Plato's view it should be as if the
pilot loses control over the ship and is
sort of no longer can steer the ship but
the pilot can still think his thoughts
but that's not what H happens right so
it seems like our thoughts are are
intimately intertwined with the activity
of the brain and its proper functioning
sure and we we sense this Unity that
everything we have is is one Unity but
if something happens in one part of the
brain I won't be able to see or I won't
be able to read or I won't be able to
talk and everything else will be the
same so it's very clear that different
parts of the brain uh uh are responsible
for different modalities of sense and
thinking and so that what seems to be a
Unity is is an illusion of unity then
there's all this dispersion so no doubt
that that's right so you're pushing me
towards a very
materialistic point of view that says
that you all this Soul stuff is is
ancient history and what we are is our
physical grade yeah but I want to stop
short I I think it's possible to to to
have a a Midway sort of view uh imagine
that um we we don't yet uh have the
capacity to completely predict what
someone is thinking what they're feeling
on the basis of monitoring activity in
the brain but imagine in the fure future
neuroscientists of the future can hook
up your brain to complex computers and
the information gets processed and they
could say you're thinking about the
problem of Consciousness right now and
you're also feeling hungry and you're
the various conscious features you have
right now
um the description they might give of
what's going on in your brain though is
not capturing even if it captures causal
conditions on those conscious experience
it's not capturing the nature of the
experience itself right the so-called
quali what character feels like to be
sitting here and touch the table and see
your black shirt I mean that has a a
feeling to it there's a personal sense
to that it's an inherently subjective
phenomena that no doubt is intimately
bound up with the right kind of physical
complex phenomena but it it seems
distinct and it's hard we we don't seem
to be able to make anything of the idea
that these subjective experiences just
are spread out complex brain States uh
so what what are we to do well uh I
think the way to think about it is to
say that our brains when configured in
the right sort of way give rise to our
conscious experience cause us to have
conscious experience thoughts desires
and so forth uh but we don't need
anything else we don't need anything
else uh so so we are fundamentally
biological beings and below that
fundamentally physical beings uh but so
we we have these experiences but they
are themselves not identical to any
physical state they're they're simply a
causal product of the physical States in
a continuous ongoing evolving changing
way and causality mean if a causes B A
and B must be distinct from one another
so even though conscious experience
wholly depends causally on the proper
functioning of my brain that doesn't
mean it's identical those experiences so
just one thing here bi I'm a biological
thing uh but I've got biological
properties physical properties and yet
I've also got these experiential
properties the so-called qualia of
experience and they interact so my
experiences just as they are the product
of uh the nature of my brain at any
given moment they also in turn effect
because we think my desire for a glass
of water can lead in the right
circumstances to a physical event of my
reaching for a glass of water so that's
a harder move to make okay the first
move where the brain is producing these
things that we have this conscious
feeling one can make that argument to
where I feel that that's legitimate um
but it could be sort of what we call
epiphenomenal which means it's sort of
there it's sort of riding the crest of
this wave but it it has no causal
features that go back down because if
you're if you're now saying it can go
the other way where what you've created
from brain States is now has some
independent existence uh still 100%
caused by it
now that that can go back and change the
brain state that seems like a harder
move to make uh well this idea of uh
mental States being epiphenomenal being
uh distinct from but merely the the
effects of brain States and not doing
anything in their own right uh I would
say is a deeply problematic idea and
ultimately it it becomes a a paradoxical
conception of ourselves first of all
it's it's it's problematic because
everything we know about in in the world
does something it has some influence
right the lowliest pebble on a beach has
some gravitational influence on what's
going on around it so reality is causal
through and through so if it's right
that uh organized brains give rise to
special kinds of states that are
irreducible to the underlying brain
States they're caused they do they're
caused by brain States but not reducible
to brain States yes but so what are they
they are subjective States you can only
know about them directly ly by having
those States but they are composed of
all the physical properties of neurons
that create this no they're not they're
not physically composed at all they're
they're utterly physically dependent on
the complex state of the brain but they
are properties of the the looks of
colors and the the tastes of of of
subjective experience we have when we
taste things these are different
fundamentally different kinds of
properties is this so-called property
dualism as opposed to substance dualism
substance dualism being there's a real
separate platonic Soul or Spirit from
some you know religious spirit that's a
real separate substance but this is a a
property dualism yes I think that would
be a way to to characterize what I'm
saying you've got a duality when it
comes to conscious beings you've got a
fundamental duality of properties
physical properties which are highly
complex and structured in our case
because we're very complex physical
beings and then these mental properties
which are not identical to physical
properties these are not CH properties
of charge mass and the sorts of
properties these physicists attribute to
but they are all caused by those
properties caused by those properties so
the question is is that a distinction
which it is a distinction therefore
property DS is that a distinction
without a difference because you're
still locked into the material world
100% uh I I I think it's it is a
distinction with a difference because it
it means that they are realities in
their own right and they have an
influence it seems to me a virtue of
this way of thinking about it not a
drawback that it posits that the the
natural world is at the end of the day a
Unity causally speaking it's one unified
totality we don't have to have Minds
coming from from nowhere somehow even
though they don't have spao temporal
location interacting with bodies that do
have very precise spatiotemporal
locations so it's a virtue of of of the
this picture that it's one unified
totality but unlike materialism it uh
affords us a picture on which our
thoughts and experiences make a
fundamental difference to how things on
fault
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)