Illusionism Plausible?
There’s no doubt that we’re conscious; this much is certain. Yet there’s no mechanism that could even in principle lend this certainly. It’s impossible to design a system representing a slice of the world, even parts of itself, without ruling out the possibility of error. The simpler the mechanism, the less likely there’re errors, if only because there are fewer possible faulty moving parts.
However, the thing which is claiming to be conscious, the human brain, is curiously the most complex object found in the entire universe, and as such, contains plenty of crevices for errors. A few billion neurons are activated when we, after a convincing reflection, utter words “I am conscious”. How are we sure that the important bits are running perfectly?
I suppose this is why Illusionism, for all its counter-intuitiveness, is still, and I hate to say this, somewhat plausible.
Questions
- Is the premise certainty requires a mechanism of certainty correct?