The following essay is from a longer piece I’ve been working on addressing the subject of free-will in a framework where human/animalistic instinct still operates, and the dichotomy it poses in attempting a rationalised analysis of consciousness.
Consciousness is a term we use to explain the nature of imagination and free-will, even though we don’t really know what it means; that spark that brings the very physical to life. Yet what is consciousness, how do we actually recognise it?
What is it that defines consciousness?
How do we make the distinction between man and machine, for example?
When we begin to examine the concept of consciousness, we might identify it as a set actions, impulses, chemical reactions that follow very definite patterns that are recognisable as that which makes something ‘alive’. If then, a machine is programmed to emulate those definitive patterns, would it not be considered as living?
View original post 2,045 more words