Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.06 AVERAGE
4.06 AVERAGE
Another intriguing approach to explain consciousness as a physical phenomenon, and dismissal of the idea of a mind-body duality, or the idea of classical free-will. The only thing I found abrupt was the unjustified connection between quantum mechanics and unpredictability of many brain and other biological phenomenon. There are far more macroscopic ways to explain unpredictability based on regular chaos theory. Most biological systems are complex enough to display chaotic non-linear behavior, and quantum behavior is an unnecessary complication, which can be true, but not particularly needed to explain the observed facts.
Hard not to like this book. A breezy treatment of consciousness science, interspersed with reflections on authors life and career. You end up liking him for his style and stance on this and that. I found the religious stuff at the end unnecessary, but tolerable given the role of it in his upbringing. I found the appeal to quantum mechanics as a justification of free will to be grounded in nothing more than the author's distaste for strict determinism.
Neuroscience of correlates of consciousness from one of the rock stars of the field Koch.
I liked it very much. Some of it was very entertaining. In a few places, I just felt lost. An excellent discussion of free will, however, and that's a difficult topic. I'll probably reread that chapter.
My favorite paragraph:
"If we honestly seek a single, rational, and intellectually consistent view of the cosmos and everything iin it, we must abandon the classical view of the immortal soul. It is a view that is deeply embedded in our culture; it suffuses our songs, novels, movies, great buildings, public discourse, and our myths. Science has brought us to the end of our childhood. Growing up is unsettling to many people, and unbearable to a few, but we must learn to see the world as it is and not as we want it to be. Once we free ourselves of magical thinking we have a chance of comprehending how we fit into this unfolding universe." - p. 152.
And this should be a poster:
"No matter, never mind."
My favorite paragraph:
"If we honestly seek a single, rational, and intellectually consistent view of the cosmos and everything iin it, we must abandon the classical view of the immortal soul. It is a view that is deeply embedded in our culture; it suffuses our songs, novels, movies, great buildings, public discourse, and our myths. Science has brought us to the end of our childhood. Growing up is unsettling to many people, and unbearable to a few, but we must learn to see the world as it is and not as we want it to be. Once we free ourselves of magical thinking we have a chance of comprehending how we fit into this unfolding universe." - p. 152.
And this should be a poster:
"No matter, never mind."
A somewhat trippy book about the history of neuroscience and what science can tell us about consciousness. I have no idea if Koch's tentative theories have any basis in reality, but they're certainly fascinating.
some parts of this book are so fascinating that you can read through them over and over and still get something new out of them every time while other parts are painful reminders that I'm not smart enough to even understand a relatively dumbed down popularized version of the most basic science surrounding this subject. It's a real tight rope walk!! but that seems fair!!
I wish I could find more popular science books like this: brief, yet stimulating and revealing the personal aspects of the scientists involved
More than anything it was the title that prompted me to read this, which neatly encapsulates the major two ways I feel about consciousness and related topics. On the one hand, a materialist to the core (though whether I feel reductionist or non-reductionist changes from time to time), on the other hand someone who hears the call of notions defying his own materialistic positions, but despite finding them intriguing and fascinating, always falls back on those.
I also made me realize that it has been almost ten years since I last read a book on consciousness, which I seek to remedy this year.
Anyway, while maybe not intended as such, it was a bit of a primer on some of the newer things that happened in consciousness research recently, with Koch’s own focus on finding the neural correlates of consciousness, which appeal to my materialist side. He sheds some light on those developments and it felt much less nebulous than the last time I read about the topic, with clearer insight into which parts of the brain are more deeply involved in creating consciousness than others.
As an aside, not the main topic, but one I found interesting none-the-less, was Koch assertation that attention and consciousness aren’t the same. It’s not something I’ve thought about before, but I found it intriguing enough to look out for his publication on the topic he published together with Naotsugu Tsuchiya in 2008, which goes much more in-depth.
All that shedding light on how the brain creates consciousness doesn’t solve the hard problem, how do we get from neurons to an inner subjectivity (like many topics, I’m of two minds when it comes to this as well, sometimes thinking that there’s no problem at all, and then changing position to the other side that says there is one), and here is where I think some form of spooky extra ingredient creeps back into the discussion, though I might also misunderstand the argument of Koch.
Basically, consciousness is a physical property of all matter, but one that only becomes relevant when large repositories of information with a high level of interconnectedness between those are achieved (introducing the integrated information theory of his colleague Giulio Tononi in the process and connecting it which his concept of consciousness as physical property). Which basically means brains (or similarly interconnected structures), but not only human ones, but animals as well and other.
For me, this goes beyond base materialism, because he can’t prove this property of matter, but it’s not exactly the classical ghostly btw. the magic power of past concepts, but instead a place-holder for further scientific inquiry. I’m not sure I really buy it, but I like the idea of it, that at a highly integrated level information systems give rise to consciousness due to some property of matter.
Besides the discussion of the nature of consciousness, the book (as the title says it’s also a confession) goes in some depth into the life of Koch, his biography and what all this meant and still means to him on a personal level. Coming from a religious background and how this influenced his thinking and the struggle between those impulses and his scientific-minded search for understanding, his journey shows that once you start looking into consciousness, it can change how you think about things in considerable ways.
It’s not a long book, but definitely packed to the brim with ideas and concepts all bound up in Koch’s personal story, which I thought made for a highly compelling read. Also, one that inspired me to read more about consciousness again, something I planned to do years ago but never did.
I also made me realize that it has been almost ten years since I last read a book on consciousness, which I seek to remedy this year.
Anyway, while maybe not intended as such, it was a bit of a primer on some of the newer things that happened in consciousness research recently, with Koch’s own focus on finding the neural correlates of consciousness, which appeal to my materialist side. He sheds some light on those developments and it felt much less nebulous than the last time I read about the topic, with clearer insight into which parts of the brain are more deeply involved in creating consciousness than others.
As an aside, not the main topic, but one I found interesting none-the-less, was Koch assertation that attention and consciousness aren’t the same. It’s not something I’ve thought about before, but I found it intriguing enough to look out for his publication on the topic he published together with Naotsugu Tsuchiya in 2008, which goes much more in-depth.
All that shedding light on how the brain creates consciousness doesn’t solve the hard problem, how do we get from neurons to an inner subjectivity (like many topics, I’m of two minds when it comes to this as well, sometimes thinking that there’s no problem at all, and then changing position to the other side that says there is one), and here is where I think some form of spooky extra ingredient creeps back into the discussion, though I might also misunderstand the argument of Koch.
Basically, consciousness is a physical property of all matter, but one that only becomes relevant when large repositories of information with a high level of interconnectedness between those are achieved (introducing the integrated information theory of his colleague Giulio Tononi in the process and connecting it which his concept of consciousness as physical property). Which basically means brains (or similarly interconnected structures), but not only human ones, but animals as well and other.
For me, this goes beyond base materialism, because he can’t prove this property of matter, but it’s not exactly the classical ghostly btw. the magic power of past concepts, but instead a place-holder for further scientific inquiry. I’m not sure I really buy it, but I like the idea of it, that at a highly integrated level information systems give rise to consciousness due to some property of matter.
Besides the discussion of the nature of consciousness, the book (as the title says it’s also a confession) goes in some depth into the life of Koch, his biography and what all this meant and still means to him on a personal level. Coming from a religious background and how this influenced his thinking and the struggle between those impulses and his scientific-minded search for understanding, his journey shows that once you start looking into consciousness, it can change how you think about things in considerable ways.
It’s not a long book, but definitely packed to the brim with ideas and concepts all bound up in Koch’s personal story, which I thought made for a highly compelling read. Also, one that inspired me to read more about consciousness again, something I planned to do years ago but never did.
This book is a little dated, (from 2012) but I absolutely love it! holy heck, def recommend.