/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15259790
All great scientists do

>>15253012
By the way, I don't care about the evolutionary explanation of consciousness. There need not be one. There would not even be a universe rendered if there were no consciousnesses logged on to render defined values in spacetime to, and so consciousness didn't evolve, and even hoffman admits that. The EXPERIENCER of consciousness did not evolve. He believes the LEVEL or degree of consciousness evolved, not that the substance of consciousness itself evolved. It always was and pre=existed the universe and it is the medium in which the universe is rendered.

>>15141170
Notice also with regard to these
>>15141075
>>15141227
>>15141244
That also, we are not just talking about learning. We already there exists ways for using non-conscious
>data and algorithms to imitate the way that humans learn, gradually improving its accuracy
I will just use this concise definition of machine learning from IBM. We know that this exists. The assertion is that if you do this the right way, that a consciousness to EXPERIENCE the the learning and KNOW and UNDERSTAND that there is an entity with identity over time doing this, will somehow emerge from this non-qualitative and solely quantitative data and process. So there is a substantial, essential, and QUALITATIVE element to the issue as well. Can you create the MEDIUM of consciousness 'in' which the experience OF the learning occurs? Not just mimic some of the goings on in consciousness or what a consciousness does or the CONTENT which is presented to observer. There are even worse problems for you as well. Like meta consciousness. By the way, brains are things only ever experienced as mental objects in minds, as are physical computers. It's very strange to start from something (a brain) made of something we never experience (observer independent matter outside of consciousness) to derive as a first principle the one thing we DO have experience of (consciousness) as opposed to deriving matter from exactly what as we observe it as, namely as an object of mind, a mental object.

>>14871042
Try a strong dose of shrooms or DMT first, then talk. These substances reveal the simple truth that materialists are full of shit. Magic exists and it is easily accessible. Unfortunately most people are too stupid (you included) to even understand what this paradigm shift means for us in the large scheme of things.