Science of Consciousness

Introductory Remarks

After many years of work; i have recently found myself involved with a group of luminary minds from around the world who are engaged in an activity that is focused upon The Science of Consciousness. Those involved, have extrodinary skills and expertise in a variety of areas, which are in-turn associated with roles of significance internationally via various venues.

It is my hope that members of this group may usefully contribute when it is appropriate to do so. in the meantime, this document will seek to provide some relatively basic information.

Chat GPT

Q: How would you define the science of consiousness?

The science of consciousness is the study of the nature of consciousness, or the subjective experience of being aware of one's thoughts, feelings, and surroundings. It is a multidisciplinary field that draws on research and theories from a range of fields, including psychology, neuroscience, philosophy, and computer science.

In the science of consciousness, researchers aim to understand the neural basis of consciousness, the relationship between the brain and consciousness, and the ways in which consciousness arises and evolves. They also study the various forms of consciousness that exist, such as wakefulness, sleep, and altered states of consciousness, and the ways in which consciousness can be altered or influenced by external factors.

The science of consciousness is a complex and difficult field, and there is still much that is not understood about the nature of consciousness. However, advances in neuroscience and other fields have led to a greater understanding of the neural basis of consciousness, and researchers continue to make progress in understanding the nature of this elusive and fundamental aspect of human experience.

Ontology and Human Dignity

Whilst it is important to understand the intended meaning of ontologies, as does relate to a particular set of tooling that provides a particular series of practical capabilities. This does in-turn relate also to UnderstandingOntologies more broadly.

In relation to the designs of SemanticWeb SemWebOntologies the vast majority of ontologies are built on-top of OWL family of ontologies, whereby the modern version is OWL 2. These ontologies are built into many of the leading Semantic Web Ontology tools, and whilst not mandatory - it is difficult to create alternatives other than via manual means - as least, that's been my experience so far. The Top Level concept in OWL is 'Thing'; and whilst this is usefully applied to every owl:thing the appropriateness of employing this term to provide support for HumanCentricAI and HumanCentricDigitalIdentity which thereby also needs to figure out how to describe aspects relating to Human Consciousness in a manner that is not sought to be described in a way whereby a owl:thing may have a possessive relationship over natural persons, is fairly critical to the requirements for the TheValuesProject and related semantics.

This field of work is enormously complex; and discussions about it in good faith, often leads to difficulties that are fundamental to a persons own sense of being; which whilst sought to be rendered support in ways that are morally appropriate, the broader implications are often poorly understood generally; and there is some discussion about the sorts of implications that are sought to be addressed in the document about SocialAttackVectors.

The broader belief is, that the ability to address these sorts of very complex issues will only really become more pragmatically feasible once Webizen3.0 is employable with WebizenApps that can support such things as HyperMediaContainers that enable persons whose skills are remarkable; but that they're expertise is not in developing modern computer software; more specifically, as a software programmer.

Another part of the means through which this important are of consideration is sought to be addressed in manner that should minimally improve upon the circumstances of how AI (online platforms) work today; will be emboided in the SemWebOntologies and PermissiveCommonsTech related works (inclusive to: TemporalSemantics ); and, the information provided about that work will help to inform how i will update and improve this document, in future.

In the meangtime; i've asked OpenGPT / OpenAI for its point of view; per below,

OpenAi

Q: Define what is a personal ontology - as does relate to the use of AI and the nature of how a human being is defined both by themselves and their environment, including socio-economic influences

A: A personal ontology is an individual's understanding of the nature of reality and the concepts that exist within it. It reflects an individual's beliefs, values, and assumptions about the world and their place within it, and it is shaped by their personal experiences, cultural and social context, and education.

Personal ontologies can be complex and multifaceted, and they can vary significantly from person to person. They can also change and evolve over time as an individual's experiences and understanding of the world changes.

In the context of AI, personal ontologies can be relevant in several ways. For example, an AI system that is designed to interact with humans may need to take into account the personal ontologies of its users in order to effectively communicate and understand their needs and preferences. In addition, the design of an AI system may be influenced by the personal ontologies of the designers, reflecting their values and assumptions about the world and the role of AI in it.

Socio-economic influences can also shape personal ontologies, as an individual's economic and social status can shape their experiences and understanding of the world. For example, an individual's personal ontology may be influenced by their socio-economic background, their education, and the social and cultural norms that they are exposed to. Understanding these influences can be important for designing AI systems that are fair and unbiased, and that are able to effectively serve the needs of a diverse user base.

It is also worth noting that personal ontologies can sometimes come into conflict with each other, leading to misunderstandings and conflicts. For example, two individuals with different personal ontologies may have different beliefs or assumptions about the nature of reality, leading to difficulties in communication and understanding.

In the context of AI, it is important for designers and users to be aware of these potential conflicts and to take steps to address them. This can include designing AI systems that are able to adapt to and accommodate different personal ontologies, and engaging in dialogue and communication to build shared understanding and resolve misunderstandings.

Overall, personal ontologies are an important aspect of human experience and understanding, and they can have significant implications for the design and use of AI systems. It is important for designers and users to be aware of personal ontologies and to consider them in the design and use of AI systems in order to ensure that they are effective and fair.