Difference between consciousness and unconsciousness

It is difficult to understand the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness. From Hawkins' idea, new input that is already in the memory process is basically unconscious. On the other hand, if the new input is not in the memory, the input runs up the stairs of neocortex, and (probably) finally reaches hippocampus. (And it is recognized.)

But even if the new input is unknown, someone may miss it. On the other hand, even if the new input is already-known, some can recognize it if he wants to be in a meta-cognition state.

And if it is so, difference between consciousness and unconsciousness might be  difference between [he is in a meta-cognition state] and [he is NOT in a meta-cognition state].

Ex: I feel I can remember a rest of the song after I hear beginning of the song with unconsciousness state. On the other hand, I can also remember it with conscious state if I intend to hear it with remembering when & where I heard it before.

Before, on the blog entry: "I" can have a consciousness of metacognition while "I" recall an episodic memory which includes "I". I wrote, "Each episodic memory associates each other, and "I" portion recognizes metacognition if the memory includes "I". To recognize it in itself, synapse strong relationship is important. Even if "I" have an experience to hear the song on TV, it is not quite enough.

Therefore, whether consciousness or unconsciousness might not be so important. And there may be an intermidiate state that is between consciousness and unconsciousness.

While considering the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, some people might be looking for homunculus. As I wrote on the blog before, "pseudo homunculus", which is generated from plural episodic memories which include "I", should be considered. This "pseudo homunculus" probably seems as if it observes all of the brain with a process of associating each other as "I".

Consciousness reserch: NCC and IIT interesting topics at ASSC17

I watched ustream of ASSC17 with great interest. During the ASSC17 I felt the weight of IIT (integrated information theory) increased gradually. (Also I heard the era of NCC was over. However I think the observation method for NCC will be also used for future reserch.)

Before (around April 2012), From image of IIT I also associated with "association" that is the key of my hypothesis. This week I re-read (a little old) post of scientificamerican, documents from twitter, and the Wikipedia, regarding IIT again. I re-understand that Phi: a level of integrated information theory is similar to possibility of association.

Therefore I understand the idea of Giulio Tononi is not far from the idea of Jeff Hawkins. (Hmm Tononi would not understand that.) I would like to ask Hawkins how he understand Phi. I think the key of Hawkins' hypothesis is also association. So I expect he understands well.

Though I do not understand 100% of the idea of Tononi, my hypothesis:  association to prediction, metacognition, free will, and seamless access between the [usual] episodic memory and memory of [genes] like instinct might be explained by this, if IIT relates to association. It is difficult for me to show my hypothesis with numerical expression. However the idea of Tononi might be a hint of the method. Though there may be unconscious in spite of high Phi, it probably is the problem of threshold. And the threshold is based on surprise, and I think it is a function of metacognition.

At this point I do not say whether Phi is same as phenomenal consciousness, or not. I do not care if qualia affects brain or not, if I accept qualia arises from physical phenomenon.

As I tweeted before, consciousness outline would be found out in a year or so. If Phi is similar to possibility of association, we could find conscious arises automatically from association between each information. At this point "association" means the process of bringing ideas or events together in memory or imagination.

*This entry is retouched based on the twitter on 7/22/2013.

Keyword: neuroscience, consciousness

Free will from alternatives may be an illusion, because searching may be based on the memory of free will of other people.

If there is free will (at this point it means [pseudo] free will), "I" can change my mind any time, and realize the change is by myself.

My hypothesis [pseudo free will]: "I" search some alternatives while some decision are made. "I" search from my episodic memory.

However, free will from alternatives may be an illusion, because searching may be based on the memory of free will of other people. And decision may be from memories including free will. Also change of mind may be an illusion, because it may be based on the episodic memory of [success of change of mind].

However again, "I" could realize free will, with the understanding of free will (and/or change of mind).

My program "BLUE" keeps the memory of [searching from alternatives] and [change of mind], and they can be associated from every input. Also I would like to try to create the new program with using English. I would like someone to inform me a web API program for morpheme analysis.

On twitter I called the free will "phantom". Is it better to call it "illusion" than "phantom"?

Keyword: neuroscience, consciousness

Desire is incorporated to somewhere in the neocortex as memory of genes like instinct.

Also my program "BLUE" shows instinct and emotion, as same as metacognition.

While considering emotion, "desire" should be considered at the same time. My hypothesis considers that desire is incorporated to somewhere in the neocortex as memory of genes like instinct. This is also aided by Vernon B. Mountcastle's hypothesis: all parts of the neocortex operate based on a common principle.

Based on this hypothesis, it is believed that desire is treated like an episodic memory of gene that ancestors had in the past. At this point [desire] means ex: like [want to know that I did not know].

And I think the [usual] episodic memory and [gene's] memory have seamless access each other. One of my hypothesis is this seamless access between episodic memory and instinct.

Emotion could be considered as we consider that consciousness is based on association from memories if episodic memory and instinct are seamless.

Note (my another small hypothesis): Emotion is based on the gap between the motivation (desire) and current status.

Keyword: neuroscience, consciousness

"I" can have a consciousness of metacognition while "I" recall an episodic memory which includes "I".

Only with #JeffHawkins 's basic theory, he did not claim that [consciousness, metacognition, free will, instinct, desire and emotion] were shown as feasible. At this point my program "BLUE" shows metacognition, free will, instinct, desire and emotion, as same as consciousness.

Regarding metacognition, my hypothesis considers [consciousness based on memories including oneself] based on #JeffHawkins's basic theory. "I" can have a consciousness of metacognition while "I" recall an episodic memory which includes "I". Each episodic memory associates each other, and "I" portion recognizes metacognition if the memory includes "I".

Ex: Having a memory that [(For "me") to think so then] did not seem positive. - I know the idea is not positive.

Consideration: [The memory of AA] leads ["my" association of AA]. So I make a proposal to call [the memory of AA] "pseudo homunculus". And it behaves in a way that it observes meta-input.

Ex: [The memory of metacognition] and [my association of metacognition] are called and used everytime the keyword "metacognition" is input to the brain system.

*This entry is retouched based on the twitter on 4/10/2013 to 4/17/2013. And some portions are from my Japanese blog on 12/24/2011.

Keyword: neuroscience, consciousness

Advance study - "On Intelligence": Jeff Hawkins - before studying consciousness

This book was released in 2004, however the important thing to remember is "There are keys in it to understand consciousness."

As Jeff Hawkins says, [association to prediction] process is based on [input to memory]. And his hypothesis claims his brain neocortex model feasible. Actually I also feel that the input to be well-known if the input is already in the memory. If the input is not in the memory, the input would be sent to upper state, and understood if it is in the upper state memory.

This process does not require an observer in the brain. Each neuron fires and only associates with next neuron. Consciousness arises at each neuron decentrally. And each portion understands the situation, (not central controlled.) At this point his hypothesis's thought [of generalization and supplemental if the input is incompletion] works in the background.

In "On Intelligence" there were a lot of excellent thoughts. However some "wet" portions were not shown mainly. At this point I consider the "wet" portions: consciousness, metacognition, free will, instinct, and emotion are very important. My program: BLUE considers (also) the "wet" portions as the key for behavior as human including consciousness.

Keyword: neuroscience, consciousness

The "blocks world" of consciousness - minimum toy-model of human's consciousness, as SHRDLU showed AI

In this blog I will write about neuroscience, consciousness and AI mainly.

In Japanese, I am writing a blog. (You can of course translate with Google from Japanese to English.) In it, I released a program of AI on 2/10/2013, and developed the basic theory of Jeff Hawkins's "On Intelligence".

The program shows "blocks world" of consciousness. - That shows minimum toy-model of human's consciousness, as SHRDLU showed AI.

The "blocks world" of consciousness is developed from the basic theory of Jeff Hawkins.

Next I will explain more about this.

Keyword: neuroscience, consciousness