From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watdragon.uwaterloo.ca!logos.uwaterloo.ca!cpshelle Mon Aug 24 15:41:45 EDT 1992
Article 6687 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watdragon.uwaterloo.ca!logos.uwaterloo.ca!cpshelle
>From: cpshelle@logos.uwaterloo.ca (cameron shelley)
Subject: Re: what is consciousness for?
Message-ID: <BtG0Eq.KBz@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca>
Sender: news@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca (USENET News System)
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <1992Aug21.160415.21106@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 15:30:25 GMT

rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes:
[...]
> >                                     It would indeed be interesting to
> >look at what consciousness is by looking at what conscious learning
> >does in contrast to what unconscious learning does.  Could you give a
> >couple of examples that show this? 
[...]
> When you are riding a bicycle, the procedure to turn left is:
>    turn the handlebars slightly to the right;
>    this causes the bike to lean to the left;
>    now when the lean reaches the appropriate angle, turn the handlebars
> 	left;
>    finally, when the turn is complete, turn the handlebars slightly
> 	further to the left;
>    this cause the bike to resume a vertical position;
>    when vertical, straighten the handlebars.
> Most bike riders are not consciously aware of this procedure.  In
> particular most are unaware of the initial step of turning the handlebars
> right.  Yet you have the unconscious knowledge to do this, learned by
> experience.  Incidently, being consciously aware of the procedure does
> improve control of the bike; it helps to not have the conscious fighting
> the unconscious for control.  I would characterize this procedure as
> knowledge learned unconsciously, and for most people, knowledge they
> are not consciously aware they have.
[...]
> Probably most of the semantics of our language is learned unconsciously.
> You can consciously learn a dictionary definition.  But semantics is
> much richer than that definition.  You unconsciously learn about all of
> the associations with the word from your experience in hearing and seeing
> the word in use.

So, if I understand you correctly, the difference between conscious
and unconscious learning is not necessarily what is learned or how,
but the awareness (or intention?) of learning.  At least this is the
meaning I take from "it helps to not have the conscious fighting the
unconscious for control" in the bicycle example.  It seems that
conscious learning is really learning per se, but lubrication for
unconscious learning.  But if the conscious and unconscious can be at
odds during learning, then the presence of a consciousness doesn't
seem to guarantee that learning will be more accurate or rapid, does
it?

Is it possible that, rather than providing rapidity, consciousness
provides breadth to the range of things that can be learned?

</dev/cam
--
      Cameron Shelley        |"In the beginning, there was nothing.  Then
cpshelle@logos.uwaterloo.ca  | God said `Let there be light', and there
    Davis Centre Rm 2136     | was still nothing, but youse could see it."
 Phone (519) 885-1211 x3390  | --Dave Thomas, SCTV:_Sunrise Semester_


