Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × subject_ss:"Consciousness"
  1. Becker, A.: Verstehen und Bewußtsein (2000) 0.01
    0.0057845935 = product of:
      0.023138374 = sum of:
        0.023138374 = product of:
          0.06941512 = sum of:
            0.06941512 = weight(_text_:theory in 516) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06941512 = score(doc=516,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1780563 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.042818543 = queryNorm
                0.3898493 = fieldWeight in 516, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=516)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    LCSH
    Comprehension (Theory of knowledge)
    Subject
    Comprehension (Theory of knowledge)
  2. Cole, C.: ¬The consciousness' drive : information need and the search for meaning (2018) 0.00
    0.0045731226 = product of:
      0.01829249 = sum of:
        0.01829249 = product of:
          0.05487747 = sum of:
            0.05487747 = weight(_text_:theory in 480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05487747 = score(doc=480,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.1780563 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.042818543 = queryNorm
                0.30820292 = fieldWeight in 480, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=480)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Footnote
    Weitere Rez. unter: https://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/17830/19659: "Author Charles Cole's understanding of human consciousness is built foundationally upon the work of evolutionary psychologist Merlin Donald, who visualized the development of human cognition in four phases, with three transitions. According to Donald's Theory of Mind, preceding types of cognition do not cease to exist after human cognition transitions to a new phase, but exist as four layers within the modern consciousness. Cole's narrative in the first part of the book recounts Donald's model of human cognition, categorizing episodic, mimetic, mythic, and theoretic phases of cognition. The second half of the book sets up a particular situation of consciousness using the frame theory of Marvin Minsky, uses Meno's paradox (how can we come to know that which we don't already know?) in a critique of framing as Minsky conceived it, and presents group and national level framing and shows their inherent danger in allowing information avoidance and sanctioning immoral actions. Cole concludes with a solution of information need being sparked or triggered that takes the human consciousness out of a closed information loop, driving the consciousness to seek new information.
    Cole's reliance upon Donald's Theory of Mind is limiting; it represents a major weakness of the book. Donald's Theory of Mind has been an influential model in evolutionary psychology, appearing in his 1991 book Origins of the Modern Mind: Three Stages in the Evolution of Culture and Cognition (Harvard University Press). Donald's approach is a top-down, conceptual model that explicates what makes the human mind different and exceptional from other animal intelligences. However, there are other alternative, useful, science-based models of animal and human cognition that begin with a bottom-up approach to understanding the building blocks of cognition shared in common by humans and other "intelligent" animals. For example, in "A Bottom-Up Approach to the Primate Mind," Frans B.M. de Waal and Pier Francesco Ferrari note that neurophysiological studies show that specific neuron assemblies in the rat hippocampus are active during memory retrieval and that those same assemblies predict future choices. This would suggest that episodic memory and future orientation aren't as advanced a process as Donald posits in his Theory of Mind. Also, neuroimaging studies in humans show that the cortical areas active during observations of another's actions are related in position and structure to those areas identified as containing mirror neurons in macaques. Could this point to a physiological basis for imitation? ... (Scott Curtis)"
  3. Chalmers, D.J.: ¬The conscious mind : in search of a fundamental theory (1996) 0.00
    0.0038563958 = product of:
      0.015425583 = sum of:
        0.015425583 = product of:
          0.04627675 = sum of:
            0.04627675 = weight(_text_:theory in 4413) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04627675 = score(doc=4413,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1780563 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.042818543 = queryNorm
                0.25989953 = fieldWeight in 4413, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4413)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    What is consciousness? How do physical processes in the brain give rise to the self-aware mind and to feelings as profoundly varied as love or hate, aesthetic pleasure or spiritual yearning? These questions today are among the most hotly debated issues among scientists and philosophers, and we have seen in recent years superb volumes by such eminent figures as Francis Crick, Daniel C. Dennett, Gerald Edelman, and Roger Penrose, all firing volleys in what has come to be called the consciousness wars. Now, in The Conscious Mind, philosopher David J. Chalmers offers a cogent analysis of this heated debate as he unveils a major new theory of consciousness, one that rejects the prevailing reductionist trend of science, while offering provocative insights into the relationship between mind and brain. Writing in a rigorous, thought-provoking style, the author takes us on a far-reaching tour through the philosophical ramifications of consciousness. Chalmers convincingly reveals how contemporary cognitive science and neurobiology have failed to explain how and why mental events emerge from physiological occurrences in the brain. He proposes instead that conscious experience must be understood in an entirely new light--as an irreducible entity (similar to such physical properties as time, mass, and space) that exists at a fundamental level and cannot be understood as the sum of its parts. And after suggesting some intriguing possibilities about the structure and laws of conscious experience, he details how his unique reinterpretation of the mind could be the focus of a new science. Throughout the book, Chalmers provides fascinating thought experiments that trenchantly illustrate his ideas. For example, in exploring the notion that consciousness could be experienced by machines as well as humans, Chalmers asks us to imagine a thinking brain in which neurons are slowly replaced by silicon chips that precisely duplicate their functions--as the neurons are replaced, will consciousness gradually fade away? The book also features thoughtful discussions of how the author's theories might be practically applied to subjects as diverse as artificial intelligence and the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
  4. Roth, G.: ¬Das Gehirn und seine Wirklichkeit : kognitive Neurobiologie und ihre philosophischen Konsequenzen (1994) 0.00
    0.0028922968 = product of:
      0.011569187 = sum of:
        0.011569187 = product of:
          0.03470756 = sum of:
            0.03470756 = weight(_text_:theory in 4380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03470756 = score(doc=4380,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1780563 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.042818543 = queryNorm
                0.19492465 = fieldWeight in 4380, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4380)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    LCSH
    Mind / brain identity theory
    Subject
    Mind / brain identity theory
  5. Koch, C.: Consciousness : confessions of a romantic reductionist (2012) 0.00
    0.0019281979 = product of:
      0.0077127917 = sum of:
        0.0077127917 = product of:
          0.023138374 = sum of:
            0.023138374 = weight(_text_:theory in 4561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023138374 = score(doc=4561,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1780563 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.042818543 = queryNorm
                0.12994976 = fieldWeight in 4561, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.1583924 = idf(docFreq=1878, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4561)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    In which I introduce the ancient mind-body problem, explain why I am on a quest to use reason and empirical inquiry to solve it, acquaint you with Francis Crick, explain how he relates to this quest, make a confession, and end on a sad note -- In which I write about the wellsprings of my inner conflict between religion and reason, why I grew up wanting to be a scientist, why I wear a lapel pin of Professor Calculus, and how I acquired a second mentor late in life -- In which I explain why consciousness challenges the scientific view of the world, how consciousness can be investigated empirically with both feet firmly planted on the ground, why animals share consciousness with humans, and why self-consciousness is not as important as many people think it is -- In which you hear tales of scientist-magicians that make you look but not see, how they track the footprints of consciousness by peering into your skull, why you don't see with your eyes, and why attention and consciousness are not the same -- In which you learn from neurologists and neurosurgeons that some neurons care a great deal about celebrities, that cutting the cerebral cortex in two does not reduce consciousness by half, that color is leached from the world by the loss of a small cortical region, and that the destruction of a sugar cube-sized chunk of brain stem or thalamic tissue leaves you undead -- In which I defend two propositions that my younger self found nonsense--you are unaware of most of the things that go on in your head, and zombie agents control much of your life, even though you confidently believe that you are in charge -- In which I throw caution to the wind, bring up free will, Der ring des Nibelungen, and what physics says about determinism, explain the impoverished ability of your mind to choose, show that your will lags behind your brain's decision, and that freedom is just another word for feeling -- In which I argue that consciousness is a fundamental property of complex things, rhapsodize about integrated information theory, how it explains many puzzling facts about consciousness and provides a blueprint for building sentient machines -- In which I outline an electromagnetic gadget to measure consciousness, describe efforts to harness the power of genetic engineering to track consciousness in mice, and find myself building cortical observatories -- In which I muse about final matters considered off-limits to polite scientific discourse: to wit, the relationship between science and religion, the existence of God, whether this God can intervene in the universe, the death of my mentor, and my recent tribulations.
    Footnote
    Now it might seem that is a fairly well-defined scientific task: just figure out how the brain does it. In the end I think that is the right attitude to have. But our peculiar history makes it difficult to have exactly that attitude-to take consciousness as a biological phenomenon like digestion or photosynthesis, and figure out how exactly it works as a biological phenomenon. Two philosophical obstacles cast a shadow over the whole subject. The first is the tradition of God, the soul, and immortality. Consciousness is not a part of the ordinary biological world of digestion and photosynthesis: it is part of a spiritual world. It is sometimes thought to be a property of the soul and the soul is definitely not a part of the physical world. The other tradition, almost as misleading, is a certain conception of Science with a capital "S." Science is said to be "reductionist" and "materialist," and so construed there is no room for consciousness in Science. If it really exists, consciousness must really be something else. It must be reducible to something else, such as neuron firings, computer programs running in the brain, or dispositions to behavior. There are also a number of purely technical difficulties to neurobiological research. The brain is an extremely complicated mechanism with about a hundred billion neurons in ... (Rest nicht frei). " [https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2013/01/10/can-information-theory-explain-consciousness/].

Languages

Classifications