/sci/ - Science & Math

>this thread again

>>12056029

To have a scientific discussion about consciousness, you first have to define consciousness scientifically. When people talk about consciousness, 99.99% of the time they skip this crucial step.

You're asking about consciousness. Define it functionally. Explain what psychological function it serves and how to measure it. If not, shut up - you're the one involved in neo-hippie bullshit philosophical masturbation

>>12056360
>If not, shut up

*sighs at the idiot who says stupid npc predetermined shit and points at the op who masterfully predicted his shitty behaviour*:
>>12056029
>shitty ultra rational denial of anything outside the inmediate material world

>>12056029
https://www.qualiaresearchinstitute.org/

>>12056029
>why does a certain organization of molecules and electrons causes a signal that makes something thats somewhere """""experience""""" pain pleasure pride love or whtever

Remember we evolved as an optimization for reproduction. We can't really trust much of what we feel. Consciousness isn't exactly an illusion, but it could be an illusion in the sense that the brain can basically convince you of anything.

I think when things operate on the right time scales, the frame-by-frame flipbook turns into a movie. In our brains, the underlying thing is still the flipbook, but it runs fast enough that it feels like a movie to us, and consciousness is the experience of watching the movie and altering it in (what we perceive as) real-time. Or at least I think that's one part of it.

>>12056029
I believe Neuroscience will be able to answer this question.
sitting on a chair and thinking hard about stuff hasn't worked for thousands of years when it comes to conscioussness.
We know so much about the brain yet there is still much more we don't know, the field itself has great momentum I hope they get close to an answer within a decade.

>>12056029
It's your brain your fucking mystic retard. Just wait till you have a stroke and try make this thread again

>>12056377
Mysterianism is still a form of dualism. Materialism since QM has always been about how we understand physical facts rather than what something is made of.
If our science can't touch it even in theory then it is something other-than-physical facts.

>>12056029
There’s no scientific approach to consciousness. It’s literally magic and proof that god exists. /thread

>>12056029
consciousness is a quantum computer. its energetic maximum is in the brain. the brain is not equal to consciousness as dipshits like >>12056877 want to repeat ad-infinitum because they think that magically makes it true.

the mind is quantum, ie it functions as a single indivisible entity and its primary function is computing. all other structural information is ancillary to this primary function

>>12056980
This. Consciousness is a slice of god/the eternal/the universe. It is not an emergent property of the brain

>>12056029

www.optimuminstitute.org/scholarship

The second hour specifically.

Can we, like, just pin that shit? That site answers ALLLLLL the fucking questions that get posted here you liberal, bitch, faggot, pussy, Jew, cucks

>>12056993
talk out your ass some more, buddy

>>12056993
Explain to me why mind is atomic unit even when split personality disorder is a thing.

It's probably some form of substance dualism or something. Every atom has a little slice of consciousness that can be organized into different ways in the same way atoms can be organized into different molecules.
So the reason that dopamine "feels good" is literally because the atoms that form dopamine are the "feel good" consciousness.
The reason split nerve endings "feel painful" is literally because those atoms are the "feel pain" consciousness.
Etc.

>>12056874
>I believe Neuroscience will be able to answer this question
but it already did
and it wasn't even neuroscience but neurosurgery dealing with tumors and that guy who got a nail and the other with a iron bar induced lobotomy...
jeez /sci/ is full of pseuds and ignorant zoomers...

>>12057942
the phineas guy from the railway?

>>12057942
The nail and iron bar lobotomy does not solve this issue you pseud moron.
Anyone would be pissed off with an iron bar through their head.

>>12056360
>you forst need to define it
Thats what we are trying to do. Gravity is not defined before its formulized by newton.

>that feel when no philosophical zombie gf

>>12056360
>the only thing you can empirically observe is hippy bullshit
this is what sci-cucks unironically believe

>>12056360
This is you rn. You are probably to stupid to realize this rn tho. You'll think I'm being hyperbolic or something.

The only scientific approach to consciousness is materialism. Any other """""hypothesis""""" or """""""""""theory""""""""""""" is literally not scientific.

>>12058448
Kill yourself qualianigger, go shit sensations or something you can't even define.

>>12058580
>Doesn't know what sensations are.
Your missing out on life. World must look pretty bleak.

>>12058580
>if I can't define it it means that it doesn't exist!
You are literally not intelligent

>>12058587
>willful misrepresentation
This is your brain on emotion, you have no arguments and must word salad your way through reality, dodging facts and shitting on your species

>>12058599
Seems I triggered qualianiggers huh
What are you gonna do, secrete untestable spirits?

>>12058603
There is more to sensation than the physical information described by moving atoms. If you can't see this you aren't conscious.

>>12058619
The p-zombie is a thought experiment similar to Schrodinger's cat, faggot
Ironically enough, you FAILED at a THOUGHT experiment. By your own standards you're less conscious that I am

>>12058608
>"y-you're triggered!"
You are not intelligent

>>12058630
>>12058603

>>12058636
Except there is no word salad
You're not making an argument. You're taking something that all of us are experiencing, and then claiming that because at the moment we are unable to rigorously define it, it means it does not exist.
This is objectively unintelligent and shows that you're an idiot.

>>12058640
>>12056877

>>12058677
Not an argument.
My uncle had a stroke and he hasn't changed at all

>>12058684
My ass also had an stroke and it understands the evidence better than you and your uncle

>>12058693
Cope and no argument, again.

>>12058695
You're who has no argument, qualianigger
All you can do is dodge and proyect, as you have zero evidence and you can't define whatever you believe you're talking about
Your shit is unscientific and appeals to emotion, you don't understand how to formulate hypothesis, and you ignore those that go against your Chopra bullshit
Fuck off

>>12058580

You need to check out Donald Hoffman's work

>>12056777
This. Science needs to explain what properties of physical particles formed in a certain way develop consciousness.

>>12058743
Cope and no argument. You show you don't even understand what it is that is being discussed when people talk about qualia.

I thought sci was a place for scientific discussion. But it's like I'm in some weird /x/ board. Consciousness needs a materialistic explanation, anything else is just pseudoscience bullshit.
Even one idiot says that consciousness proves the existence of god, wtf /sci/?

Consciousness is paramount everything stems from it rather than it being a creation of the universe it created the universe. (it is god)

>>12063223
You are not understanding.
The point is, IF there does not exist a materialist explanation for consciousness, then it doesn't exist, regardless of if YOU decide that there must be one.
Calling it "psuedoscience" does not mean anything.
Saying "it NEEDS a materialist explanation" does not mean one actually exists and does not mean humans will inevitably find one one day.
Saying "muh scientific discussion" means nothing.
You anons who deny the decades of debate on this topic because you have pre-concieved notions of how the universe HAS to work, based on your own philosophies of ontology, are retards.
It may be the case that consciousness has a materialist basis. It may be the case that some form of property dualism is true. It may be the case that some form of epiphenominalism or substance dualism is true.
Claiming that a materialist explanation MUST be true, is retarded and you are a retard. We do not know and all evidence and arguments on the topic so far are NOT pointing in a materialist direction.

>>12063251
The universe is materialistic and mechanical. Why do you expect something else out of it? Are you retarded?

>>12063272
>The universe is materialistic and mechanical.
This is not actually known and you simply asserting your ontology as though it is true, does not make it so.
The existence of qualia already drives a hard wedge into this ontology which is why materialists are so desperate to claim qualia doesn't exist despite having no arguments against the litany of empirical evidence of their existence.
And "mechanical", most likely you mean "deterministic"? The universe is not deterministic either.

>>12063272
yeah she is
>>12063179
retard, go read a book instead of posting magical nonsense

>muh ontology
Here we go again, this nigga is going to build walls of text full of word salads instead of just conceding he's an ignorant faggot
Fuck off to /x/ already, schizo

>>12063295
reminder there is no empirical evidence of qualia, because it's a philosophical -attempt of- concept, and it hasn't been found and will never be, because it doesn't exists
and because of that, it is untestable, unfalsifiable and unscientific

>>12063319
>there is no empirical evidence of qualia
>t. Literal NPC.

>>12063561
show it for everyone to see then, qualianigger