God Riddance

Hi Mr. Ryan, I enjoy the wealth of information you provide on your blog. I've noticed you've taken up the "hard problem" of consciousness. If you want any help, or criticisms about consciousness or mind, I can help out. My specialty is cognitive science, with a focus on A.I. Though, I'm starting to dabble in cognitive psychology and neuroscience. In particular, I like reading about the binding problem, which is important for developing a naturalistic theory of consciousness.

Hi Sir Moogie! I'm glad you enjoy the site. I am planning on adding a few things, for instance, an article on Biblical prophecy, something on the Qu'ran, and something on the "Fine Tuning" argument of the Universe. Anyway, what exactly is the binding problem?

The binding problem is "the problem of how the unity of conscious perception is brought about by the distributed activities of the central nervous system". [1] This is the most succinct way of putting the problem, but there are several binding problems in neuroscience. One problem has to do with the vision system (i.e. how do all the photoreceptors, and neurons in the visual cortex produce a unified "image"). Another would include how each modality, coupled with what is know as attention; memory; and intentions unify into one phenomenal experience. [1] -Antti Revonsuo and James Newman. Binding and Consciousness (editorial) Consciousness and Cognition 8, 123–127 (1999)

I don't know. I should get out "Consciousness Explained" and look that up. I think it would have to do with nerves "sending signals" to the brain and then the brain kind of sorting it out. Dan Dennett has proposed the "Multiple Drafts Model" in which the brain is constantly making "drafts" just like an editorial process, trying to unify everything of the senses.

Moogie and Ryan, have you read Dawkins' "Unweaving the rainbow" ? In the last 2 or 3 chapters of that book, Dawkins explains how our brain builds a 3D model of 'reality' via our very limited array of senses. Dawkins also lists quite a few tests that we can conduct that show how our brain works to build this model and how easily we can trick it in ways that make a nonsense of the model (sensory illusions and such). Are we talking about the same thing ?

I haven't read the book, but how our brain constructs visuospatial images* is one of the binding problems, and one of the more readily studied in neuroscience. It sounds like that might be what Dawkins is talking about, but he's an evolutionary biologist, who also comments on evolutionary psychology. This is not to say that he's not capable of discussing neuroscience (after all I'm a computer science graduate student who has a vested interest in cognitive science), but rather that his book most likely discusses how the various systems (could) arise from the evolutionary point of view. While this is important, what some neuroscientists studying binding problems are looking for is how humans get a single perspective/experience from all these neuron firings. Often called the "hard problem" in philosophy. One of the reasons I doubt this might be what Dawkins is talking about, is the problem is still open, several theories are still being debated, and you seem to portray Dawkins as explaining a solution. * - Whether they be from the photoreceptors in the retina stimulating neurons in the optic nerve, and so on; or from internal intentional imagining, or unintentional dreaming/hallucinating. I'll see if I can get a hold of the book from the library to get a better grasp on what Dawkins is talking about. If he is talking about a solution to a binding problem, I'd be curious to see what sources he utilized.

Hi Moogie, based on what you say above I don't think you would learn much from "Unweaving the rainbow". Dawkins only discusses 'what is' rather than how or why. His various illusions and tricks only highlight that the brain is doing this sort of modeling. Dawkins does sort of talk about the big 'why?' (efficiency) but not the detail of why this way or that way. It's a non-technical read and, typical of Dawkins, leaves little room for misunderstanding.

I clicked the "Stumble!" link on my browser and ended up here. I'm three months late, but still cool to unintentionally stumble upon people I already know. Hi Assy! Hi SirMoogie!

Hey Cass! Doesn't get too much activity. His blog gets much more.

Who does it belong to? I know I've heard the name "God Riddance" before, but can't recall who had come up with it.

Hi Cass, Switch owns the blog and this forum. Some genius came up with the name for it : )