Paulh,
Clark's "scaffolding" concept is certainly interesting. As I noted elsewhere, I am reading Clark's book "Microcognition" regarding PDP, and in it he make a similar point regarding how the mind's computational structures exploit regularities in the surrounding environment as to more efficiently and more expansively store and utilize information to enhance survival. As Boagie said, humans especially (but all animals, to varying extents) exploit a wide variety of environmental "constant conjunctions" as to expand survivability and species dominance; e.g. our sleep cycles, the sun and moon, the seasons, the tides, the pull of gravity, the spark of electrical charges, the glow of fire, etc. The world is our notepad, isn't it. The scaffolding was provided by nature and our species learned to climb it. We even learned the idea behind scaffolding and used it to create our own cognitive scaffolds, e.g. paper and pencil, books, computers, the internet, social memes, etc. (Think of the information that an ancient human culture managed to store and access through Stonehenge).
Now as to whether the concept of scaffolding from the cognitive standpoint (within the realm of Chalmers' "easy problem of the mind") can be extended to the core experience of consciousness (i.e., into the wilds of the "hard problem"), that is a VERY interesting question. We certainly do experience varying levels or degrees of consciousness over the course of any day. We exist in quasi zombie-like states in bored or depressed times (sounds like my job! Ditto for millions of others, so I've been told) for extended periods, e.g. driving to work, doing the wash, photocopying another report for the bosses. And then there are the peak moments, the thrill moments, the fulfilling experiences, the moments of time-slowing dread in the second before a terrible vehicle accident, the quasi-dread of a bungie jump, when the fountain of consciousness seems to runneth over. What might be a "scaffold" to support such intensity of "qualia" and emotional response, and what do they tell us?
Well, I agree that neuroscience can tell us a lot about neurotransmitters and neural map activations and neuron firing rates and constellation sizes and turnovers. These certainly are different in peak arousal versus depression and boredom. We can synthetically create activations that boost conscious experience levels; e.g. caffeine, alcohol, music, sexual symbolism, narcotic drugs, etc. They work in various ways, but the neurochemistry is rather cut and dried. So, I suppose these could be considered "scaffolds" towards pleasurable conscious intensity. Too bad that they often have deleterious long-term effects. In a way, they are like taking a loan; you can increase your pleasurable consciousness now, but you will pay back in the future with increased sleepiness, torpor and bad moods. Oh yes, let's not forget the bungie jumping and other high-risk recreation activities. They may not have many long-term mind-dulling side effects, but they certainly do increase the chances of injury and pain.
And then there are the less peaked but longer lasting boosts to conscious intensity given by positive social interactions and positive accomplishments. Society, at its best, acts as a scaffold to consciousness. Socializing with others can be a source of positive (and negative) arousal. People often enjoy activities such as eating or listening to music or viewing art or engaging in sports activities more when in the company of another person interested in the same. Accomplishments that are acknowledged by others are also a source of consciousness arousal. Just working towards an accomplishment that will likely be acknowledged, or will have some effect on others (hopefully positive effects) makes boredom go away, especially if engaged in with another person (or co-conspirator, in the case of criminal activity). So, happiness arguably requires some type of mental scaffolding, often in the form of social relationships and interactions. So too would the worst forms of angst and dread.
To the degree that we have "free will" then, or agent intentionality capacity, perhaps we seek those structures that get us out of the bogs of boredom and hopeless depression. Once we meet the other basics, e.g. oxygen, water, carbohydrates, temperature regulation, safety, security.
So, these are just some odd thoughts on the "scaffold to consciousness" idea. They don't amount to much more than folk philosophy, rough advice on 'what life is about'. But hey, "real philosophy" should ultimately say something on this level too. IMHO.
Jim G.
An Eternal Student Of / For Life 
07-27-2008, 01:18 AM
...
...
Similar Threads 
