The blog author responds to the quote:In a stroke of imaginative genius our understanding of consciousness was radically transformed, but in an entirely unexpected way. Critical clues came from diffuse nerve nets and, even more extraordinarily, plant neurobiology. Banished forever was the idea that the brain alone was the seat of consciousness. Rather, it is an ‘antenna’ embedded in a hyperdimensional matrix.
Lol! WTF?A blog author wrote:A fascinating suggestion, I think, and well worth reflection. Such an idea is at the foundation of a multi-volume book project that I hope, someday, to complete.
The quoted author's exercise grants an instructive glimpse into a common misunderstanding about the problem consciousness.
Ernest Nagel wrote a short essay called "What it's like to be a Bat", which became the definitive statement on the problem of consciousness. Supposing that we learn everything there is to know about the hyperdimensional matrix, how does that tell us anything more than we already would guess about the experience a bat has during echolocation?
Appealing to future physics helps explain what it's like to be a bat the same way proposing a second turtle helps explains how the earth stays in place and doesn't fall.
In a variation, that second turtle could be a spiritual turtle, or a turtle at one with the cosmos, or a turtle consecrated by God himself, and it doesn't help solve the problem. In fact, it's a problem that festers the more it gets scratched. Imagining the experience of a bat was hard enough, but now we've got to imagine what it's like to be an antenna connected to a hyperdimensional matrix. The problem of consciousness gets more severe as the explanations of consciousness go deeper.