Bilinç Neden Var: Teleo-İşlevsel Bir Analiz

Bilinç var. Fakat olmayabilirdi. Birer zombi olabilirdik. Fakat onun yerine deneyimleyen varlıklarız. “Bilinç neden var?” sorusu, bilinçle ilgili sorulabilecek en önemli ve ilginç sorulardan biridir. Önemi açıktır. İlginçliği ise, başlangıçta cevabı son derece bariz görünse de üzerinde düşündükçe ne kadar çetrefilli olduğunun anlaşılmasında yatmaktadır. Biyolojik bir fenomen olduğu varsayılan bilincin neden var olduğunu (etiyolojisini) araştırıyorsak zamanda geriye giderek ilk zuhur ettiği anı düşünmeli ve evrimsel açıdan organizma için nasıl bir avantaj sağladığını sorgulamalıyız. Buna göre, fenomenal bilincin etiyolojik bir işlevi, dolayısıyla adaptif bir değeri olmayabilir. Dahası, genetik varyasyonla ortaya çıkması olası olmadığından evrimsel bir ürün de olmayabilir. Bu da bilincin biyolojiyle sınırlanamayacağı düşüncesini gündeme getirmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

fenomenal bilinç, bilincin işlevi, etiyolojik işlev, bilincin evrimi, bilincin gereksizliği, zombi, epifenomenalizm

Why Does Consciousness Exist: A Teleo-Functional Analysis

Consciousness exists. But it might not have. We could have been zombies. But instead we are experiencing beings. The question of why consciousness exists is one of the most important and interesting questions that can be asked about consciousness. Its importance is clear. The reason for its being interesting is that although the initial answer seems to be quite obvious, thinking about it reveals how complicated the issue is. If we are investigating the supposedly biological phenomena of consciousness, we have to go back in time and think about the moment it first emerged and question its evolutionary advantage for the organism. Accordingly, phenomenological consciousness may not have an etiological function, and therefore no adaptive value. Moreover, it may not be an evolutionary product, as it is unlikely to occur with genetic variation. This raises the idea that consciousness is not a strictly biological phenomena.

Keywords:

phenomenal consciousness, function of conscousness, etiological function, evolution of consciousness, conscious inessentialism, zombie, epiphenomenalism,

PDF

___

Armstrong, D. (1980). The Nature of Mind and Other Essays. New York: Cornell University Press.
Baars, B. (2017). “The Global Workspace Theory of Consciousness: Predictions and Results.” Susan Schneider ve Max Velmans (Der.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness (2nd Edition) içinde (s. 229-242). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.
Blackmore, S. ve Troscianko, E. T. (2018). Consciousness: An Introduction (3rd Edition). London and New York: Routledge.
Block, N. (1995). “On a Confusion about a Function of Consciousness.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18(2): 227-287.
Block, N. (2002). “Concepts of Consciousness.” David J. Chalmers (Der.), Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings içinde (s. 206-226). New York: Oxford University Press.
Block, N., Flanagan, O. ve Güzeldere, G. (Der.) (1997). The Nature of Consciousness. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Chalmers, D. J. (2010). The Character of Consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1995). “The Unimagined Preposterousness of Zombies.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(4): 322-326.
Earl, B. (2014). “The Biological Function of Consciousness.” Frontiers of Psychology, 5(697): 1-18.
Flanagan, O. (1992). Consciousness Reconsidered. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Godfrey-Smith, P. (2014). Philosophy of Biology. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Harnad, S. (2002). “Turing Indistinguishability and the Blind Watchmaker.” James H. Fetzer (Der.), Consciousness Evolving içinde (s. 3-18). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Hill, C. S. (2009). Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horst, S. (1999). “Evolutionary Explanation and the Hard Problem of Consciousness.” Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6(1): 39-48.
Huxley, T. (2002[1874]). “On the Hypotheses That Animals Are Automata, and Its History (Excerpt).” David J. Chalmers (Der.), Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings içinde (s. 24-30). New York: Oxford University Press.
Kirk, R. (2005). Zombies and Consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press.
Koch, C. (2004). The Quest for Consciousness: A Neurobiological Approach. Colorado: Roberts and Company.
Kriegel, U. (2004). “The Functional Role of Consciousness: A Phenomenological Approach.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 3(2): 171-193.
Lycan, W. G. (1996). “Functionalism.” Samuel Guttenplan (Der.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind içinde (s. 317-323). Oxford: Blackwell.
Macphail, E. M. (2009). “Evolution of Consciousness.” Tim Bayne, Axel Cleeremans ve Patrick Wilken (Der.), The Oxford Companion to Consciousness içinde (s. 276-279). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maley, C. J. ve Piccinini, G. (2018). “The Biological Evolution of Consciousness.” Rocco J. Gennaro (Der.), The Routledge Handbook of Consciousness içinde (s. 379-387). New York and London: Routledge.
Mayr, E. (2002). What Evolution Is. London: Phoenix.
Nagel, T. (1974). “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” The Philosophical Review, 83(4): 435-450.
Onur, F. (2019). “Bilinç Problemi ve Panpsişizm.” MetaZihin, 2(1): 67-91.
Polger, T. (2017). “Rethinking the Evolution of Consciousness.” Susan Schneider ve Max Velmans (Der.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness (2nd Edition) içinde (s. 77-92). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.
Polger, T. ve Flanagan, O. (2002). “Consciousness, Adaptation and Epiphenomenalism.” James H. Fetzer (Der.), Consciousness Evolving içinde (s. 21-42). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Robinson, Z., Maley, C. J. ve Piccinini, G. (2015). “Is Consciousness a Spandrel?” Journal of the American Philosophical Association, 1(2): 365-383.
Rosenthal, D. M. (2005). Consciousness and Mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Seth, A. (2009). “Functions of Consciousness.” William P. Banks (Der.), Encyclopedia of Consciousness içinde (s. 279-293). Oxford: Elsevier.
Tye, M. (1996). “The Function of Consciousness.” Noûs, 30(3): 287-305.