Content deleted Content added
| (785 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{
{{Article history
|action1=GAN
|action1date=19:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
|action1link=Talk:Consciousness/GA1
|action1result=listed
|action1oldid=458342969
|topic=philrelig
|action2 = GAR
|action2date = 15:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
|action2link = Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Consciousness/1
|action2result = delisted
|action2oldid = 1258754775
|currentstatus = DGA
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Medicine|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Neuroscience|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Epilepsy|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=High|science=yes|mind=yes|continental=yes|analytic=yes|modern=yes|contemporary=yes}}
{{WikiProject Psychology|importance=Top}}
{{WikiProject Cognitive science}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|maxarchivesize = 120K
|counter = 5
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(100d)
|archive = Talk:Consciousness/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Portal box|Medicine|Philosophy}}
{{Broken anchors|links=
* <nowiki>[[Philosophy#Western philosophy|Western philosophers]]</nowiki> Anchor [[Philosophy#Western philosophy]] links to a specific web page: [[Western philosophy]]. The anchor (#Western philosophy) is no longer available because it was [[Special:Diff/1162637430|deleted by a user]] before. <!-- {"title":"Western philosophy","appear":{"revid":408676564,"parentid":408676540,"timestamp":"2011-01-18T22:43:57Z","removed_section_titles":[],"added_section_titles":["Branches of philosophy","Western philosophy","Ancient philosophy (c. 600 BC–c. AD 400)","Medieval philosophy (c. 400–c. 1350)","Renaissance philosophy (c. 1350–c. 1600)","Early modern philosophy (c. 1600–c. 1800)","Nineteenth-century philosophy","Twentieth-century philosophy","Eastern philosophy","Babylonian philosophy","Chinese philosophy","Indian philosophy","Persian philosophy","Japanese philosophy","Korean philosophy","Main theories","Realism and nominalism","Rationalism and empiricism","Skepticism","Idealism","Pragmatism","Phenomenology","Existentialism","Structuralism and post-structuralism","The analytic tradition","Moral and political philosophy","Human nature and political legitimacy","Consequentialism, deontology, and the aretaic turn","Applied philosophy","See also","References","Further reading","Introductions","Topical introductions","Anthologies","Reference works","External links","CITEREF1948","CITEREF1994","CITEREF1895","CITEREF1996","CITEREF1990","CITEREF1982","CITEREF1995","CITEREF1909","CITEREF2007","CITEREF2006","CITEREF2001","CITEREF1986","CITEREF1992","CITEREFRussell1999","CITEREF1985","CITEREF2005"]},"disappear":{"revid":1162637430,"parentid":1162479639,"timestamp":"2023-06-30T09:29:21Z","removed_section_titles":["CITEREF2011","Western philosophy","CITEREFHegelBrown2006","Ancient era","CITEREFWhitehead2010","CITEREFKenny2004","Medieval era","CITEREFKenny2007","Modern era","Middle Eastern philosophy","Pre-Islamic philosophy","CITEREFLichtheim1976","CITEREFNajovits2004","CITEREFAssmann2004","Islamic philosophy","Eastern philosophy","Indian philosophy","Buddhist philosophy","East Asian philosophy","African philosophy","Indigenous American philosophy","CITEREFFrankLeaman2005","CITEREFBartholomewGoheen2013","CITEREFChurton2005","CITEREFNasrAminrazaviJozi2008","CITEREFKeddie2013","CITEREFde Blois2000","CITEREFGutas1998","CITEREFCooperYue2008","CITEREF1992","CITEREF2013","CITEREFJohnson2009","CITEREF2021","CITEREFSedlmeierSrinivas2016","CITEREFMittalThursby2017","CITEREFBowker1999","CITEREF2014","CITEREF1978","CITEREFChadha2015","CITEREF1990","CITEREFFrazier2011","CITEREFOlson2007","CITEREFDeutsch2000","CITEREFGrimes1996","CITEREFHiltebeitel2007","CITEREFMinor1986","CITEREFDoniger2018","CITEREFBilimoria2000","CITEREFBhattacharya2011","CITEREFBronkhorst2012","CITEREFLochtefeld2002","CITEREFBasham2009","CITEREFWynne2011","CITEREFJayatilleke2010","CITEREFDundas2002","CITEREF1998","CITEREF1983","CITEREFJaini1998","CITEREF1994","CITEREF2006","CITEREFBuswellLopez2013","CITEREFDreyfus1997","CITEREF2011","CITEREFEbrey2010","CITEREFO'Brien2019","CITEREFPerez1998","CITEREFJanz2009","CITEREFImbo1998","CITEREFWhiteley1998","CITEREFPierotti2003","CITEREFPortilla1990","CITEREF2012","CITEREFMaffie2002","CITEREFYeakel1983","CITEREFAdamesChavez-Dueñas2016","CITEREFNuccetelliSchutteBueno2013","CITEREFWebb2012"],"added_section_titles":["Western","Arabic-Persian","Indian","Chinese","CITEREFAdamsonTaylor2004","CITEREFAdamson2020","CITEREFAdamson2022","CITEREFAdamsonGaneri2020","CITEREFAdamson2019","CITEREFAdamson2016","CITEREFAndreaOverfield2015","CITEREFAnsteyVanzo2023","CITEREFBanhatti1995","CITEREFBeaney2013","CITEREFBilimoria2018","CITEREFBlackson2011","CITEREFBoydTimpe2021","CITEREFChamankhah2019","CITEREFChambreMaurerStrollMcLellan2023","CITEREFCopleston2003","CITEREFDalal2021","CITEREFDehsen2013","CITEREF2010","CITEREF2017","CITEREF2023","CITEREF2020","CITEREFFrede2022","CITEREFGlenneySilva2019","CITEREFGraham2023","CITEREFGrayling2019","CITEREFGriffel2020","CITEREFGupta2012","CITEREFGutas2016","CITEREFIannone2013","CITEREFKaminski2017","CITEREFKelly2004","CITEREFLaerkeSmithSchliesser2013","CITEREFLittlejohn2023","CITEREFLong1986","CITEREFMacDonaldKretzmann1996","CITEREFMarenbon2023","CITEREFMarshev2021","CITEREFMenon","CITEREFNasrLeaman2013","CITEREFNasr2006","CITEREFPerrett2016","CITEREFPooleyRothenbuhler2016","CITEREFQi2014","CITEREFRambachan1994","CITEREFRescher2014","CITEREFRizvi2021","CITEREFRuether2004","CITEREFSantinelloPiaia2010","CITEREFScharfstein1998","CITEREFSlingerland2007","CITEREFSmart2008","CITEREFVerene2008","CITEREFZack2009"]},"very_different":false,"rename_to":"Hindu philosophies"} -->
}}
== Untitled ==
Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.
If further archiving is needed, see [[Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page]].
*[[Talk:Consciousness/
*[[Talk:Consciousness/
*[[Talk:Consciousness/Archive 3|Archive 3 (13/04/07 to 29/11/09)]]
== GA concerns ==
I am concerned that this article doesn't follow the [[WP:GA?|good article criteria]] anymore. Some of my concerns are highlighted below:
*There is a lot of uncited text throughout the article.
*There are some sections that rely upon block quotes. This creates copyright concerns and increases the word count. This information might be better as summarised prose.
*The article, at over 11,000 words, is above the recommended length at [[WP:TOOBIG]]. I think this might be a sign that this is too detailed. I think removing most of the block quotes will resolve this, but the article should be edited for too much detail.
*The lead does not summarise all major aspects of the article.
Is anyone interested in fixing up this article or should this go to [[WP:GAR]]? [[User:Z1720|Z1720]] ([[User talk:Z1720|talk]]) 18:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
:as the assessment showed, the topic is... very complex. ablockqyote in the page shows FORTY different definitions found by one researcher: medical-c is not distinguished from big-C, Chalmers describes big-C as "a hard problem", famous Western philosophers try to study the Upanishads and fail, the Wikipedia page on Advaita Vedanta gets chopped-and-changed by spiritually well-meaning individuals with no Wikipedia experience, I mean the whole ``thing`` is a mess basically :) the page ultimately reflects pretty accurately the confusion in Humanity's general Consciousness (ha ha) about what big-C actually is. regarding the suggestion to provide a better summary (made below) I have to say that that is a REALLY intimidating task on such a high-profile scientifictopic. it should be done with great care and a lot of review, no matter how simple the summary ends up being. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 08:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
==GA Reassessment==
{{Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Consciousness/1}}
== Recommendation: Split this article into separate articles for different meanings of the word ==
In all other cases I know of, Wikipedia distinguishes different meanings of a word that defines an article, so that different meanings are covered in separate articles.
I strongly recommend that this be done with this article.
In particular, there '''really''' should be a separate article for the subject known to philosophers as "phenomenal consciousness": the phenomenon of experience. [[Special:Contributions/2601:204:F181:9410:B5A7:6072:A62E:4507|2601:204:F181:9410:B5A7:6072:A62E:4507]] ([[User talk:2601:204:F181:9410:B5A7:6072:A62E:4507|talk]]) 15:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
:I did an intensive study of this topic and found that there is a medical definition known as little-c (to help distinguish from e.g. a coma) and then there is big-C. mentioning this very early and prominently in the article and referring to a separate page for the ``medical`` definition would I feel be a much better idea than splitting up what I think you would find is a high-profile (high pagerank) page. the practice of linking to other pages is already established in this page by having a subheading, a "see article X", and a single summary paragraph. I feel that "phenomenal consciousness" is better treated in this fashion, alongside medical-little-c, rather than breaking up this page. let me do a quick check to see if phenom-c has an article already [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 07:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:ok a search on Wikipedia for "phenomenological consciousness" very interestingly gives the Qualiapage https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia where a Google search "phenomenal consciousness wiki" search more usefully turns up ://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher-order_theories_of_consciousness in which phenom-c is discussed. wikipedia's own search mechanism not so on-the-ball there. let's just check if the HOTC page is used in this one... [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 07:49, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:ok done, added HOTC to "see also" and then noticed on reading that page that there is a phenom-c page noted in the HOTC one! irony. the HOTC one I also observed has a "related articles" categorisation, will investigate that next [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 08:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:ok I am pretty happy with just adding the link to the HOTC page, however its description as "scientific theory" is pretty lame, resulting in See also getting an utterly useless summary. more crucially I spotted that there is a "medical-little-c" section in this page which has no clear distinction from big-C as is done in the Academic literature. that's really important to highlight [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 08:12, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:although it is not "fun", it is a simple fact that world-wide this important topic is a mess of confusion as so many people have tried to make sense of it. the page accurately and correctly and faithfully and explicitly notes, documents, and explains that. knowledge cannot be created which does not exist :)
:what you are seeing is a normal part of the summarise-and-refer process on wikipedia,but because of the ''overwhelming'' number of uses (over 40) of the word, even the collation of ''summaries'' is ridiculously long. phenomenology ''already has'' its own page! bottom line, trying to "fix" the "problem" can only do more harm than good. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 13:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
== Discern medical-little-c clearly from big-C ==
as noted above Academic literature goes to some lengths to distinguish "not in a coma" as in "the patient is conscious" as a synonym for "awake and alert" or "the patient was not unconscious", from the study of the phenomenon of Consciousness which is termed "big-C". the article has a medical section which is fantastic but it is not made at all clear that there is a recognized distinction between consciousness and Consciousness. this really important! [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 08:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:as a very quick hack I have added a disambiguation link to the "Altered levels of consciousness" page. it's nowhere near clear enough but is along the right lines. Google searches discerning little-c from big-C are also a god-awful mess: lots of unhelpful links to YouTube videos involving philosophical discussion, and even googleAI is throwing its weight around (summarizing the state of human opinion on little-c *philosophy* instead of helping with the medical definition. sigh. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 09:25, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:aiyaa! there is a page "Altered levels of consciousness" which is medical and there is a page "Altered state of consciousness" which is classified as *philosophy*! this entire topic is a rabbit-hole time-sucking mess! :) [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 09:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
:on a re-read I decided to revert the disambiguation adding "Altered levels of consciousness" as it is different from the disambiguation of "Conscience" etc. not sure what is best, here. needs thought [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 11:03, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
== added ref to recent study on the Claustrum (needs work) ==
turns out Crick and Koch were wrong, the Claustrum is more a "router" than a seat of Consciousness itself. I added the URL but it needs work to put in the right format. "The new findings and hypothesis were published on Sept. 30, 2022, in Trends In Cognitive Sciences." [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 08:35, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
== Disclosure regarding editing and discussion ==
partly for my own convenience so as to have easy access to the material including academic references I recently wrote two pre-print articles on consciousness. I am making other editors aware that I am aware (ha ha) of the state (implied pun intended) of Consciousness.
* http://lkcl.net/reports/consciousness_definition/
* http://lkcl.net/reports/consciousness_turing/
* http://lkcl.net/reports/consciousness_epigenetics/
based on this I will create a separate quick section here for review on the collated Definitions of Consciousness that my research found. fascinatingly one of them, by Cleeremans and Jimenez, is actually a definition of ''learning''. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 12:47, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
== new section Academic Definitions of Consciousness (review needed) ==
I added a new section, academic peer-reviewed theories and papers that define consciousness. by contrast most academics discuss how hard it is to define. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 11:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
:eek, note duplication on AC page, see separate talk section below [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
== Clarifying misleading impression that (one) Dictionary definition is absolute-authoritative (review needed) ==
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1298465194 apologies to whomever kindly made this cr3version, but I feel strongly that allowing one of the *dictionary* definitions of Consciousness to become the de-facto unilateral absolute definition, by implication and omission, is very misleading. one researcher found FORTY separate and distinct functional uses for the word "consciousness". if there was one and only one, of course I would agree 100% that that quoting a dictionary definition would be superfluous to say "this comes from a dictionary". but in the case where there are FORTY definitions, it is dangerously misleading to prioritize ONE of them as the impression that it is the de-facto canonical authority is clearly false. letting people know that this topic is chaotic, confusing, laced with division and uncertainty, is really quite important as it could lead tobreaththroughs and additional research. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
:ok yes if you look in the section "problem of definition" the pre-existing quotes of both Webster and Cambridge are preceded by "According to..." which sets the precedent of clarifying and qualifying that there is division on the definition. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:09, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
:I requested a quick [[WP:GAR]] followup just to make sure this high-profile topic does not go without oversight [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:20, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
== GNWT not GWT (edit not needed - clarified) ==
quick note, GNWT is missing from the page, not to be confused with GWT
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/2025/landmark-study-puts-leading-theories-of-consciousness-to-the-test-neither-comes-out-unscathed [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 19:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
:urrrr... another discussion of theories of consciousness https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763425000533 [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 19:31, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
:okaaaay GNWT is *part* of Bernie's GWT. ow it makes sense https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehaene%E2%80%93Changeux_model [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 19:42, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
:I spoke with Bernie Barrs and he confirmed the history. Dehaene and Changeux we're working on a neural computational analogue in 1986(?), heard of GWT, and Bernie, I gather from the tone of his reply, seemed honoured that they chose the name GNWT. anyway: all good, a little garbled but no name-change needed. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 08:44, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
== dead link to paper ==
i don't know what exactly the policy is but guessed that finding the paper on researchgate is probably better than leaving a dead link, appreciate someone doing what is supposed to be done, for the 1st reference (40 different uses of Consciousness) [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:05, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
== gently on the editing folks! ==
editing large pages is tricky, I note the past few revisions have unintentionally reverted to older edits, and I suspect that what is at play is a bug in Wikipedia browser cacheing old data. I have noticed this several times: the contents displayed are NOT what is the current edut. much appreciate people who have kept an eye on this and reverted accidental damage. the obvious tiresome recommendation "clear browser cache" holds if you keep a Wikipedia page open for prolonged periods of time. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 10:01, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
:raised on phabricator https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T399385 [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 10:10, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
::As one of the editors who has recently made a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Consciousness&diff=prev&oldid=1299867155 large reversion], can you provide any diffs where you believe this problem has occurred? [[Special:Contributions/fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four]] ([[User talk:fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|talk]]) 13:22, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
:::if you go back to the point where you had to make the reversion, that '''is''' the point where the problem has occurred. as a software engineer i realised that there is a race-condition in the javascript-based editor, that is there all the time but ''only likely to be triggered on very large pages''. like this one. i raised it as a bugreport but due to the PTSD from psychological torture and the Ischemic strokes from Domestic Violence, with the wikipedia developers not listening i was forced to unsubscribe from the discussion: i cannot risk further engaging with them. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 09:08, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
::::Must be [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Consciousness&diff=prev&oldid=1299858758 this diff] from the IP editor, I had thought when they said in their edit summary {{tq|"unhelpful, unclear and indirect language and the language used is not suitable for encyclopedia's"}} they were rebutting your edit which expanded on the definitions of consciousness, I thought they were trying to revert your lede change by copying and pasting from an older version. That's my idea of what happened as a layperson at least. [[Special:Contributions/fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four]] ([[User talk:fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|talk]]) 14:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
:::::yeah there were a whole stack: trying to even ask those two editors "when did you leave the tab open in your browser and for how long" is a futile exercise :) and I can see how you could have got that impression. I would not have guessed what is going on if I had not myself witnessed the corruption of an older edit being kept in a tab (I keep MANY tabs open, Fulguris has "sessions", one of my sessions had 600 tabs, another 200, etc) [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:21, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
:::basically i recognised an older version of the page: an editor made some minor link-related changes but i recognised the submission of a first paragraph that was at least two weeks out-of-date. look at the very same reversion-diff you posted: notice how the entire first paragraph is modified? that was ''entirely unintentional'' - the editor had no idea that '''wording''' was being reverted. all the editor was trying to do was make some whitespace changes, which you can see further down the diff. so hilariously the diff you posted ''is'' where the problem occurred :) i had a similar potential-corruption occur a couple weeks back but was observant enough to correct it. it took a HELL of a lot of browser-refreshing, i can tell you, to get the damn page to reflect latest changes. which tells me that the problem is a server-side "cache expiry" tag reporting issue combined with a javascript race-condition bug. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 09:14, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
== huge duplication on AC page ==
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/talk:artificial_consciousness#duplication_of_parts_of_consciousness_page huge duplication and also some much better worded sections, just flagging it here [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 18:11, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
:ok whew, done editing session, my opinion is that the aspects of Consciousness section on the AC page is too specifically worded to AC to be moved here. needs further discussion [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 06:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
== technical help with the Graziano reference ==
hi could someone kindly help clean up the Graziano reference style, I am not sure what to do, having copied the ref from the [[Artificial consciousness]] page it is a different style there [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 05:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
:Like [[Special:Diff/1301188391|this]]? [[Special:Contributions/fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four]] ([[User talk:fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|talk]]) 14:58, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
::... errr yes! thank you :) oh I know what was going on, the AC page has separate Bibliography as well as a References section. I never knew you could have a Bibliography on Wikimedia. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 09:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
== IIT proposes 1:1 states-map ==
so does someone else and also Bernie Barrs, see AGI page, making reminder for myself here ://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Consciousness&diff=1302721542&oldid=1301772488 [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 23:57, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
:actually AC not AGI [[Artificial consciousness]] [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 23:59, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
== "with no one definition being agreed on" ==
first sentence, a kind contribution qualified the "40 uses as challenging" first sentence, but the problem with saying "no '''one''' definition is agreed on" implies that all other '''uses''' of the word are invalid, which they aren't. it's like the word "free" which has multiple meanings, "monetarily zero cost" and "Liberty" being two - French has a separate word "Libre". so it needs a little more thought and I agree with the editor [[User:BogyBearAtAParty]] that there is a valid ambiguity here. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 03:33, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
:"prospects for reaching any single, agreed-upon, theory-independent definition appear remote." - even this drops down to what is termed "Big-C" use of the word rather than acknowledges little-c as separate in its own right! argh! :) but it is just too early in the article to start diving into that type of depth, the first paragraph is supposed to be a summary. I really don't think this can be "undone" safely given that the entire topic - not the Wikipedia page per se - is such a dog's dinner mess. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 03:59, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
:how about "about forty separate and distinct meanings have been identified, using the same word in each case". [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 04:22, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
::I'd prefer the lede avoid numerics and lean towards being more brief, if vague. What do you think of something like:
::{{tq|The term '''consciousness''' has a variety of meanings and uses, many of which can be identified and categorized based on ''functions'' and ''experiences''. A single, agreed-upon, theory-independent definition does not currently exist.}}
::I don't think this suggestion is perfect, and I'd like to find some other way to gesture towards the ideas of consciousness other than saying its near to {{tq|''functions'' and ''experiences''}}. Possibly {{tq|"... of meanings and uses, many of which '''involve [[awareness]], [[cognition]], and [[perception]]'''. A single ..."}} would work instead? [[Special:Contributions/fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four]] ([[User talk:fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four|talk]]) 05:18, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
:I know what's happening: Consciousness is being conflated with a group term. the same word being used 40 times makes it appear that only one is valid. "the patient is conscious" is a measurement on the Glasgow scale, as a *medical* term. it doesn't mean they are seeking God! :) both uses are totally valid but the same word used for both. [[User:Lkcl|Lkcl]] ([[User talk:Lkcl|talk]]) 04:33, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
::Almost every Wikipedia page on general concepts like [[science]], [[philosophy]], etc, can start with a lead saying that the subject in question is hard to define. It is not helpful to a reader to define the subject by stating that it is hard to define. [[User:Dawkin Verbier|Dawkin Verbier]] ([[User talk:Dawkin Verbier|talk]]) 12:32, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
| |||