Art by smbc-comics

Consciousness is often said to disappear in deep, dreamless sleep. We argue that this assumption is oversimplified. Unless dreamless sleep is defined as unconscious from the outset there are good empirical and theoretical reasons for saying that a range of different types of sleep experience, some of which are distinct from dreaming, can occur in all stages of sleep.

Pubmed Articles

Does Consciousness Disappear in Dreamless Sleep?

Sciencealert Article We Were Wrong About Consciousness Disappearing in Dreamless Sleep, Say Scientists

  • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    it’s the irreversible stop of some activity.

    This threshold has changed over time. So I don’t think it’s a good definition of it hasn’t always been the same point.

    And the rest of your comment is just philosophy. You’re neither wrong nor right. Definition of self is not a concept there’s really any consensus over.

    • jarfil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Threshold has changed, the definition is still the same, we’re just getting better at reverting the stop of some activities, like breathing or heartbeat. If we someday could revert neuronal depolarization, that would be great, but it seems difficult to achieve.

      The other part is not just philosophy, it’s the best we can do to define a “self”. The philosophical part is only whether we can consider them a continuum, or whether we have to see them as usually similar but separate (there are reasons to support both versions).

      • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If the threshold changed, the actual definition changed. The same words to describe a different point. If the definition described two different things, its changed. That’s basic and simple reasoning. If a definition no longer describes the same thing, it’s because it’s actual meaning has changed.

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “To the end of the road” doesn’t change meanings when the road gets extended another 10 miles. The point changes, the definition doesn’t.

          • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            yes, the definition changes. it used to mean one point. now it means a point 10 miles away. come on. simple substitution. if you define it only with relative terms then its poorly defined as there’s no actual concrete meaning. so you either have a poorly defined term or you have a term that has changed meaning over time. which still makes it poorly defined. i don’t know how else to explain it. so i’m going to leave it here. this is going in circles.

            • jarfil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think I know what you mean, but plenty of terms have relative definitions (“behind”, “bright”, “x+1”, “etc”… etc). If you’re looking for an absolute point, you won’t find one, because their meaning is the relationship itself.

              Both “life” and “death” define a state relative to another. The definition of “life” is a particularly tricky one, because it includes multiple relative definitions like “growth”, “reaction”, “functioning”, and a “reproduction” that includes both cloning and “imperfect” cloning. Being “death” the opposite, it’s necessarily as relative and tricky too.

              • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                you’re looking for an absolute point,

                Which is the crux of this whole conversation. We don’t have an actual definition of death. It’s all relative and changing over time.

                • jarfil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What surprises me, is you wouldn’t accept the relative/changing definition as a valid definition itself.

                  Guess that could be an interesting conversation, potentially shedding some light on different worldviews… but I don’t really know where to begin. Curious.

                  • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I refer you back to my original comment involving the impact of not having a good definition of death and what that causes.

                    Your definition does not clarify any of the resulting problems arising from trying to define all the other concepts.

                    It’s a good definition for some scenarios, but not at all or in any way, this one.