consciousness.txt

Volume VIII: Consciousness
==========================

Kuhn arrays all the theories on a linear spectrum, simplistically and roughly,
from the most physical on the left (at the beginning) to the least physical
on the right (near the end).

* Physicalism
* Non-Reductive Physicalism
* Integrated Information Theory
* Panpsychism
* Monism
* Dualism
* Idealism

Physicalism
-----------

Materialism is the claim that consciousness is entirely physical,
solely the product of biological brains, and all mental states can be fully
"reduced" to, or wholly explained by, physical states—which, at their
deepest levels, are the fields and particles of fundamental physics.
In short, materialism, in its many forms and flavors, gives a completely
physicalist account of phenomenal consciousness.

* Phylosophycal
* Neurobiological
* Electromagnetic
* Computational
* Homeostatic
* Embodied
* Relational
* Representational
* Language
* Phylogenetic

Non-Reductive Physicalism
-------------------------

Non-reductive physicalism takes consciousness to be entirely physical,
solely the product of biological brains, but mental states or properties
are irreducibly distinct from physical states or properties such that
they cannot be entirely explained by physical laws, principles or discoveries.

Functional organization is defined as an abstract pattern of causal
interactions among system components, their states, and input/output relations.
In MLTT, we represent a system as a record type comprising components, states,
and dependency relations.

-- A type for components of a system
Component : Type

-- A type for possible states of a component
State : Component → Type

-- A system is a record with components, states, and causal dependencies
record System : Type where
  field
    comp : List Component
    states : (c : Component) → State c
    deps : (c : Component) → State c → List (Σ[ c' ∈ Component ] State c' × Input) → State c
    ins : Type
    outs : Type
    outMap : List (Σ[ c ∈ Component ] State c) → Input → Output

Here, deps specifies how the state of each component depends on prior
states of other comp and external ins, while outMap defines system
outs based on component states.

record Isomorphic (S1 S2 : System) : Type where
  field
    compBijection : Bijection (comp S1) (comp S2)
    stateEquiv : (c1 : comp S1) → Equivalence (State c1) (State (compBijection c1))
    depPreserve : (c1 : comp S1) → (s1 : State c1) → (ins : List (Σ[ c' ∈ comp S1 ] State c')) →
                  deps S1 c1 s1 ins ≡ deps S2 (compBijection c1) (stateEquiv c1 s1) (map compBijection ins)
    inputEquiv : Equivalence (ins S1) (ins S2)
    outputEquiv : Equivalence (outs S1) (outs S2)
    outputPreserve : (states : List (Σ[ c ∈ comp S1 ] State c)) → (i : ins S1) →
                     outMap S1 states i ≡ outMap S2 (map compBijection states) (inputEquiv i)

Conscious Experience (Qualia) is presented as a type Quale, abstractly
capturing phenomenal properties. For simplicity, we assume a type Quale
without specifying its internal structure, as Chalmers focuses on qualitative
identity rather than specific qualia content.

Quale : Type

postulate
  -- A system with a certain functional organization has associated qualia
  hasQuale : System → Quale

  -- Organizational invariance: isomorphic systems have identical qualia
  invariance : (S1 S2 : System) → Isomorphic S1 S2 → hasQuale S1 ≡ hasQuale S2

To formalize the thought experiments, we model a spectrum of systems transitioning
from a neural system (S_neural) to a silicon-based isomorph (S_silicon).
We define a family of intermediate systems indexed by a parameter representing
the degree of replacement.

Spectrum : ℝ[0,1] → System
postulate
  -- All systems in the spectrum are isomorphic
  spectrumIsomorphic : (t1 t2 : ℝ[0,1]) → Isomorphic (Spectrum t1) (Spectrum t2)
  -- The initial system is neural, the final is silicon
  neuralStart : Spectrum 0 ≡ S_neural
  siliconEnd : Spectrum 1 ≡ S_silicon

For Fading Qualia, we assume (for reductio) that hasQuale S_neural ≠ hasQuale S_silicon.
By invariance and spectrumIsomorphic, this implies a gradual change in qualia across
the spectrum, leading to an intermediate system Spectrum t where hasQuale (Spectrum t)
is "faded" (e.g., less vivid). We model Joe's predicament:

postulate
  -- Joe, an intermediate system, has faded qualia but judges them as vivid
  Joe : System
  JoeInSpectrum : Σ[ t ∈ ℝ[0,1] ] Joe ≡ Spectrum t
  fadedQuale : hasQuale Joe ≠ hasQuale S_neural
  JoeJudgment : Judgment Joe (hasQuale Joe ≡ hasQuale S_neural)

Here, Judgment represents Joe's cognitive judgment about his qualia, which
contradicts the faded qualia, implying a dissociation between consciousness and cognition.

For Dancing Qualia, we consider two systems A and B (e.g., Spectrum t and
Spectrum (t + ε)) with slightly different physical makeup but significantly
different qualia. We model the switch mechanism:

record SwitchSystem : Type where
  field
    baseSystem : System
    neuralCircuit : Circuit
    siliconCircuit : Circuit
    switch : Bool → System
    switchPreserves : (b : Bool) → Isomorphic (switch b) baseSystem
    qualiaDiff : hasQuale (switch true) ≠ hasQuale (switch false)

The switchPreserves condition ensures functional isomorphism, but qualiaDiff implies
that flipping the switch changes qualia (e.g., from red to blue) without affecting
judgments, leading to the implausible scenario where the subject cannot notice the change.

Reductio Argument. Both scenarios lead to contradictions with empirical assumptions
about consciousness-cognition alignment. In MLTT, we can express this as a proof by contradiction:

postulate
  -- Empirical assumption: rational systems accurately judge their qualia
  rationalJudgment : (S : System) → Rational S → Judgment S (hasQuale S) ≡ hasQuale S

-- Reductio: Assume absent/inverted qualia are possible
postulate
  absentQualia : Σ[ S : System ] Isomorphic S S_neural × hasQuale S ≡ noQuale
  invertedQualia : Σ[ S : System ] Isomorphic S S_neural × hasQuale S ≠ hasQuale S_neural

-- Fading Qualia implies a rational system misjudges its qualia
fadingContradiction : absentQualia → ⊥
fadingContradiction (S , iso , noQ) - let
  joe - Spectrum t for some t
  faded - hasQuale joe ≠ hasQuale S_neural
  rationalJoe - rationalJudgment Joe (rational Joe)
  wrongJudgment - JoeJudgment ∧ faded
  in contradiction wrongJudgment

-- Dancing Qualia implies unnoticed qualia change
dancingContradiction : (absentQualia ⊎ invertedQualia) → ⊥
dancingContradiction (inl (S , iso , noQ)) - let
  switchSys - constructSwitchSystem S_neural S
  qualiaChange - qualiaDiff switchSys
  noJudgmentChange - switchPreserves switchSys
  in contradiction (rationalJudgment switchSys (rational switchSys) ∧ qualiaChange)
dancingContradiction (inr (S , iso , diffQ)) - -- similar proof

hese formalizations capture the implausibility of Fading and Dancing Qualia
by showing they contradict the assumption that rational systems accurately
judge their experiences, supporting the invariance principle.

Quantum
-------

Quantum theories of consciousness take seriously the idea that
quantum mechanics plays a necessary, if not sufficient role,
in the specific generation of phenomenal consciousness in
certain physical entities like brains—beyond the general
application of quantum mechanics in all physical entities.

Integrated Information Theory
-----------------------------

Predicative definition:

* Intrinsic Existence. Consciousness exists of its own inherent nature:
each experience is real, and it exists from its own inherent perspective;
to account for experience, a system of mechanisms in a state must exist
intrinsically and it must have cause–effect power.

* Composition. Consciousness is structured: each experience is
composed of phenomenological distinctions; the system must be
structured: subsets of system elements (composed in various
combinations) must have cause–effect power upon the system.

* Information. Consciousness is specific: each experience is the
particular way it is; the system must specify a cause–effectenabling
structure that is the particular way it is; the system has a
set of specific cause–effect repertoires that distinguishes it from
all other possible structures (differentiation).

* Integration. Consciousness is unified: each experience is irreducible
to noninterdependent subsets of phenomenal distinctions; the cause–effect
structure specified by the system must be unified: it must be intrinsically irreducible.

* Exclusion. Consciousness is definite, in content and spatio-temporal grain:
each experience has the set of phenomenal distinctions it has, not less or more,
and flows at the speed it does, not faster or slower; the cause–effect structure
specified by the system must be definite and is maximally irreducible intrinsically.

Panpsychism
-----------

Panpsychism is the theory that phenomenal consciousness exists
because physical ultimates, fundamental physics, have phenomenal or
proto-phenomenal properties. This means that the essence of mentality,
awareness, experience is a primitive, non-reducible feature of each and
every part or aspect of physical reality, similar to the fundamental fields
and particles in physics.

This means that the essence of mentality, awareness, experience is a primitive,
non-reducible feature of each and every part or aspect of physical reality,
similar to the fundamental fields and particles in physics. Everywhere there
is energy-matter, perhaps everywhere there is even spacetime, panpsychism says
there is also something of consciousness.

Monism
------

Monism is the theory that all of reality consists of exactly one concrete object or thing,
and everything that exists is, in some sense, that one concrete object or thing (or part of it).

Dualism
-------

Dualism is the theory of consciousness that requires two radically
distinct parts: a physical brain, obviously, but also in addition,
a separate, nonphysical substance that is not only independent of the brain but
also not of the physical world (as presently conceived). This would mean
that reality consists of (at least) two ontological categories—physical
and nonphysical, whether substances, properties, aspects, dimensions or planes of existence.

Idealism
--------

Idealism is consciousness as ultimate reality, the fullness of the
deepest level of all existence, the singular fundamental existent. It is the
theory of consciousness that takes consciousness to its maximum
meaning. The focus here is ontological idealism, where ultimate reality
is mind or awareness or thought, while everything else, including all
physical worlds and universes and all that they contain, are derivative or illusionary.



def trans (A B : U) (p : PathP (<_> U) A B) : A → B :- transp p 0
def coe (A B : U) (p : PathP (<_> U) A B) : A → B :- λ (x : A), trans A B p x
def cong (A : U) (f : A → U) (a b : A) (p : PathP (<_> A) a b) : PathP (<_> U) (f a) (f b) :- <i> f (p @ i)
def concept (o : U) :- o → U
def all-phenomenas (o : U) : U :- Π (x y : o), PathP (<_> o) x y
def nondual (o : U) (p : concept o) : U₁ :- Π (x y : o), PathP (<_> U) (p x) (p y)

def encode (o : U) : (Π (p : concept o), nondual o p) → all-phenomenas o
 :- λ (nd: Π (p : concept o), nondual o p) (a b : o),
    coe (PathP (<_> o) a a) (PathP (<_> o) a b)
         (nd (λ (z : o), PathP (<_> o) a z) a b) (<_> a)

def decode (o : U) : all-phenomenas o → (Π (p : concept o), nondual o p)
 :- λ (all : all-phenomenas o) (p : concept o) (x y : o), cong o p x y (all x y)

Open Problems
-------------

* Chalmers's meta-problem of consciousness
* Meaning/purpose/value
* Artificial consciousness
* Virtual immortality
* Survival beyond death
* Reflections

OM A HUM

[1]. Kuhn. A landscape of consciousness: Toward a taxonomy of explanations and implications. 2024