That's an interesting view. Nonetheless, i cannot see how this would solve the hard problem of consciousness at the microsubjects level. i mean, even if this is how things are and panpsychism is true, and we are conscious subjects due to (thanks to) this aggregates of micro structures, it seems to me that the "hard problem" of consciousness remains intact.

@nino5943

4 ай бұрын

Thanks! You're right, it doesn't solve the hard problem as much as it tries to present a more cohesive ontology, plus avoiding the subject combination problem. I don't think any theory gives a satisfying explanation - or anything remotely close to it - of why there's phenomenal consciousness accompanying the information processing that our brains do. They might present suggestions for how that internal life might occur or, at least in principle, be explained, but never provide an exact and fully transparent account. However, this is an issue for all current theories of consciousness. My focus was more on avoiding the subject combination problem, which my theory does, but of course faces its own set of problems (which are hopefully less serious than combination).

@robotcandy8674

3 ай бұрын

​@@nino5943I would really love to discuss my own understanding to maybe help? I think discussion is needed on th subject and not enough of us are connecting. If you would like to connect, I would love to communicate with you about it

I’ve not read your paper yet but are you saying there is a kind of holographic principle at work? Is this a kind of cosmo panpsychism? Does this in fact work as a solution to the de-combination problem?

@bglass88

Ай бұрын

This is how I interpreted it. Chris Langan has a similar principle in the CTMU called hology.