/lit/ - Literature

>>14763181
I'm talking more about the end goals of our functions than the functions themselves. There are more intelligent beings and less intelligent beings but this is only dictated by the roles that we need to perform. I.E Smarter beings tend to have more complex roles. But does this mean the level of consciousness is any different between these beings? I don't think so, which is why consciousness is completely irrelevant. You can't measure or quantify it or even prove its existence like you can with intelligence.

Take religion for example. It is a powerful stimulant irrespective to whether or not a higher metaphysical plane exists or not. If the user simply believes it is real, then to him it is and to that end lends its beneficial effects. Faith to the religious makes them content, just like in >>14763136 I said that musing on this subject also makes me happy. Whether or not the function is complex or not the end goal remains the same. So can we really say we are at a higher level of 'consciousness' than an ant colony performing its various functions?

The point I am trying to make is that 'consciousness' is a pointless, arbitrary term and should be done away with.