(Потому что наши русские читатели очень важны, мы сейчас в поисках профессионального переводчика. Мы приносим свои извинения, что на данный момент, мы можем лишь предоставить текст на английском языке.)

In his more recent book, Sweet Dreams, Dan Dennett approaches the problem of consciousness from an interesting angle; in the Net of Magic: Wonders and Deceptions in India, Dan argues, Lee Siegel lays a witty passage by preening on the logic of how some people perceive magic:

“I’m writing a book on magic,” I explain, and I’m asked, “Real magic?” By real magic people mean miracles, thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers. “No,” I answer: “Conjuring tricks, not real magic.” Real magic, in other words, refers to the magic that is not real, while the magic that is real, that can actually be done, is not real magic (p. 425 – Net of Magic).

The readers of Consciousness Explained should adopt the same logic of reasoning right at the beginning of the book in order to funnel themselves on the right path of comprehending how Dan’s theory is built. True consciousness, meaning real magic, doesn’t exist, in reality being gappy, incomplete, and very often puffed up with qualities that on closer inspection makes “us” wonder what diabolic illusion does the brain makes use of in order to delude “our” naive little minds. Prepare for the destruction of the myth of consciousness’ plenum.

The italics I’ve used for “us” and “our” are not in vain because there is another concession you’ll have to make for a non-shallow passing of Dan’s text. The “us”, the “our”, the Central Meaner which spawns the meanings, the thoughts that sprouts our utterances, and not the least, which enjoys all the pleasures, sensations in a way that only “he” can understand, doesn’t exist.

It is not that we speak the words, think the thoughts, but that the words speak us, the thoughts think us. What we call “us” is an abstraction just like the center of gravity is to a physical object, a narration that looks as if it is spoken by someone (The Immaterial Meaner, The Immaterial Thinker), but in reality it speaks itself through the fight, turmoil, pandemonium between the coalitions of neurons that make our brains.

A useful analogy to make a more solid point might be the following. I’m sure you’ve heard about a lot of cheesy conspiracy theories in your lifetime. UFOs and aliens trapped in top secret military installations, select groups of bankers working on the new world order, crazy scientists concocting the deadly virus that will put an end to all civilization letting only the privileged wealthy ones to go on living. All these conspiracy theories have one thing in common: the small group of international elites that control and manipulate governments, industry, and media organizations worldwide in order to achieve their purpose.

Conspiracy Theories about an infinitesimally small number of cooperating people controlling the slaved whole planet are highly unlikely, therefore the existence of this select group of elites capable of controlling the planet is very improbable. The same logic applies to the debate of whether there is a single central Meaner/Thinker – be it material or not – located somewhere in the brain, responsible for all the deeds and misdeeds of the rest of the brain. Dan’s book will build the sketch of a theory that will prove the non-necessity of such a place in the brain.

What you’ll find out by reading the book will be, among other things, that there is no difference between feeling something, be it emotion (anger, love), sensation (feeling cold, warm), and thinking. In reality we can safely say that all cognitive processes result in some form of thinking. It’s all about thinking. The color red is a thought, the feeling of love is a thought, the emotion of anger is a thought just like adding 2+2 in your head is a thought. The only difference between them is their idiosyncratic functional implementation which transforms these neuronal arrangements into the unique tools useful for carrying their bodies around the “possible to predict” environment in which they will carry their lives.

More >