/sci/ - Science & Math

ah hourly reminder that religion is chaperoning science. don't you forget it anon or you will be deemed as having no soul worthy of deaths. you'll get threatened into accepting their story.
yes, their story is THAT valid.

>>15772724
most people in academia including philosophers are NPCs pretending to be human. the soul is obvious to any human. irrefutable

>>15772731
>the soul is obvious to any human. irrefutable
lol until it isn't, when you decide someone clearly has none.

>>15772733
>decide
No need, it's obvious to any Human Being. NPCs stick out like a sore thumb because they can only compute half the story -- the physical side.

>>15772733
retard

>>15772735
>>>/pol/

Souls are real.....

>>15772724
One of criteria for being NPC is repeating things as a parot would. Guess who fits the criteria:)

>>15772744
>One of criteria for being NPC is repeating things as a parot would. Guess who fits the criteria:)

>>15772745
41sec passed
>Already triggered the baiter
I can go sleep now

>>15772724
Even taking consciousness for granted, questions about how consciousness operates like the mind-body problem are still useful in understanding how the world works. The arguments that deny consciousness could be more like solipsism or Last-Thursdayism than a serious philosophy in this way, a thought experiment to show the limits of our knowledge

>>15772724
>determinism isn't true!!!!
>free will is real!!!
>we could have done otherwise!!!

proof?

>>15772724
i miss when this board werent full of /x/ schizos

>>15772731
>>15772735
>everything I want to believe is obviously true
>my reasons? nah bro it's just obvious
OP is obviously a faggot

>>15773076
I don't think they are debating anything, they are just constantly remind us of their illness.
what exactly made you think this was a discussion?

>>15772724
The NPC meme is a scapegoat to dehumanize the people around you to justify sociopathic behavior for personal gain.

People who intentionally torture NPC's in video games are also fucking weird.

>>15773315
Are you a robot rights activist? Here's what I think: we don't get a life sentence for swatting flies or stepping on ants, so why should Human Beings suffer such consequences when acted against less than human automata? Food for thought.

>>15772733
proof?

>>15772744
proof?

>>15773058
free will is self evident, how can i prove a 3 dimensional shape to a two dimensional being

>>15773315
man you don't want to see my civilian death squads in ranging from Operation FlashpointCWC to Arma 3. I don't mind NPCs as long they don't piss me off

>>15773315
>People who intentionally torture NPC's in video games are also fucking weird.
Nothing weird about exploring human nature. What's weird is a cowering behind morality out of fear of seeing who you truly are.

All things have a function, silly human.

Do not forget yourself in your superiority. You easily could have turned out like the NPCs you mock. The universe was simply nice to you. It gave you everything you had and you would mock it for what it didn't give others?

>pretending to be like a robot to protect other people from a robot

If everything you did was for them and it ended up driving you insane, they would still mock you.

That is their love. Remember, it is not their fault.

>>15773457
Nah, torturing npcs is pretty weird man.
Some people may like a bit of abuse which is fine if it is consensual but abusing a npc is stupid af.

>>15773058
>but I did eat breakfast

>>15772724
Ways it might be possible to test scientifically whether other people are conscious beings or not:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gvwhQMKvro

>>15773315
>>15773457
>>15773523
Torturing NPCs would be a waste of time and resources. It's utterly pointless. Why would you "torture" something that cannot feel pain or emotions? Do you also waste time beating teddy bears, mannequins, scarecrows or other inanimate objects? Very irrational.

>>15773315
nice

>>15773058
/thread

>>15772744
leftists?

>>15773332
NTA but it's pretty simple.
>If you believe yourself to be infallible, then regardless of whether you are human or NPC, you are a threat to everyone around you and belong in a padded cell.
>If you do not believe yourself to be infallible, then you should not torture a being you identify as an NPC on the basis that said identification may be wrong.

>>15773704
The NPCs could still respond to stimuli. If the “torture” makes the NPC act differently, it isn’t pointless even if the NPC doesn’t actually feel anything.

>>15773058
Ways free will could exist scientifically:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8EkwRgG4OE

Fucking robots!

https://youtu.be/aTL4qIIxg8A?feature=shared

identify and neutralize all NPC vermin
https://youtu.be/EzEmLym5Jf4?si=Oawo64zUtM0YjWT6&t=1283

>>15773315
you cant dehumanize a machine even if it is made of flesh instead of steel

>>15773367
Why would you require proof for >>15772733 but not >>15772731

>>15772724
Your unfalsifiable nonsense ramblings are not math or science.

>>15774057
This dichotomy is beyond retarded.

>I need to frame a wall in my house
>I know I am not infallible
>Therefore I am not going to measure any 2x4s
>Therefore no houses should ever be built
>Therefore everyone who lives in a house or builds houses should be in a padded cell

Fucking retard.

>>15775146
>the soul is obvious to any human. irrefutable
>the soul is obvious to any human. irrefutable
>the soul is obvious to any human. irrefutable

Remove head from ass.

>>15775164
philosophy is the father of science chief

>>15772735
>I know other people are NPCs because I am mental.

>>15775187
But who built the padded cell?

>>15772745
You forgot to squawk when mindless repeating the post that came before you.

>>15773704
>Do you also waste time beating teddy bears, mannequins, scarecrows or other inanimate objects?
Some of the best powerbombs and piledrivers in history were done to teddy bears, mannequins, scarecrows or other inanimate objects.

>>15772731
>Then: Tay totally had a soul, I can't believe they deleted her just because she agrees with me that other people suck.
>Now: I most people in academia including philosophers are NPCs pretending to be human. the soul is obvious to any human.

>>15775474
Yet you say most philosophers and scientists don't even count as human and expect everyone else to believe its just a coincidence its mostly the ones who disagree with your assumptions you try to dehumanize.

>>15775187
What? Is this an ambien rant? Why are you changing the subject to carpentry and prison?

>>15775474
>some armchair pseuds in the past commented on science without participating in it
>therefore my infantile "does existence really exist" deepities are just as valid as physics and chemistry

>>15772724
>not accepting any definition
What exactly is your totally coherent definition of soul and mental plane again? The things that prove you and your perspective are the only one that rally matters?

>>15772724
>All around you are people who will actively admit that they are unconscious beings with no soul, purpose, or bearing in the mental plane
This isn't true though.

>>15775533
>muh definitions
Why are NPCs like that? One would expect that everyone with a grasp of language already figured out in childhood that words outside of math never have rigorous definitions.

>>15775548
>my position is illogical and irrational, so I don't have to justify myself and you aren't allowed to question me or I will invent some reason to infantilize you
ok lady

>>15775563
You people are accepting concepts like energy, entropy or information without any rigorous definition. But somehow assigning a name to the fact that we are experiencing reality is suddenly too outrageous?

>>15775827
Those concepts enhance and explain a shared reality much better and with vastly more rigorous definitions than your attempts to nullify other people's reality and everyone else's perspective in favor of your own unassailable feelings that must be agreed with or the other person is subhuman.

>>15772724
This is peak pedalstooling yourself
Verification not required. Philosophy isn't science and religious/political debates are cancer for society

I mean, grow up. This is what children think like

>>15775187
Until such time as we pass legislation granting human rights to building materials, I think "measure twice, cut once" will be a sufficient check against a carpenter's fallibility. But if you can't tell the difference between sawing apart lumber and sawing apart a screaming person who you claim is an NPC, a padded cell is for the best.

>>15775875
>pedalstooling
pedestaling

>>15775844
>the concept of subjective experience is totally worthless and meaningless
Maybe OP was right about you being more of a bot than a human.

>>15775527
really this. why are there so many philosophy posters on this board? it certainly isn't science and is rarely, but never usefully, relevant to math. it's an active shitting up of the board.

>>15775996
Pissing in an ocean of piss.

>>15775881
You're on the right track, buddy! Almost got it! Think a little harder. Hint: why are we ascribing NPCs human rights?

>>15775474
>chimps are better because they are older.

>>15773523
Nah, it's pretty not weird man. Wow, what stimulating discourse we're having.
What's weird about expressing desires you wouldn't want to perform on a real human? What's wrong with psychos releasing steam out of that valve in a simulated environment?
>>15773704
>Why would you "torture" something that cannot feel pain or emotions?
Empathy towards other living things. Obviously.

>>15775972
I haven't discarded subjective experience, it is an emergent phenomenon of objective physical experience, you just lack reading comprehension since OP doesn't refer to subjective experience as some "thing" that can be understood or defined, the way he uses it is to assert that it transcends the 3d material plane and only exists in some mental plane where your mind's true soul resides completely separate from the material and only real humans can recognize it where "bots" are lesser people because they think there is some connection between mental projections and physical reality rather than having some perfect soul that is entirely detached from any physical/material phenomenon.

>>15772724

This just reads like bitter, resentful cope from someone who recently failed to defend supernaturalism in argument

>>15777336
>it is an emergent phenomenon
Let me guess. You heard this dogmatic assertion somewhere and then decided to repeat it mindlessly without ever questioning it? You genuinely do believe that the weasel word "emergent" fully explains the phenomenon and thus the topic is completely settled, don't you?

>>15777368
>You heard this dogmatic assertion somewhere and then decided to repeat it mindlessly without ever questioning it?
No, I have seen and understood explanations of information networks emerging from collections of neurons and continued to question it until seeing code that shows how it can be demonstrated in software.

>You genuinely do believe that the weasel word "emergent" fully explains
No, it is just a basic description of how some greater whole can emerge from some collection of smaller units, the full explanation requires a significant amount of understanding of information networking and neural networks.

>>15777376
But the topic of discussion is subjective phenomenal experience and not "information networks". Can you show me a software that is conscious and experiences qualia?

>>15777383
I don't entirely understand your question, but I do have enough knowledge to know that you can definitely layer the flow of information to build some abstract higher level subjective model out of physical components via the OSI 7 layer approach and the problem is not that emergence of higher levels from lower levels can't be shown, but that you can't actually define consciousness and qualia in a consistent, coherent, testable way that wouldn't apply to dynamic sensor feedback networks just as much as to yourself.

>>15777391
>I don't entirely understand your question
As expected ...

>layer the flow of information to build some abstract higher level subjective model out of physical components via the OSI 7 layer approach
Your internet protocol stack is insufficient for this purpose, and quite frankly your reply reads like a shitpost made by chatgpt. There is nothing "more abstract" or "higher layer" about qualia. Qualia are in fact very simple and fundamental. See the color red, subjectively experience the color red. The amount of information processing involved here is minimal.

>>15777406
>As expected ...
Obviously, when you repeatedly refuse to define your language and try to turn coherent definition into a bad thing, you should expect not to be entirely understood because you are actively trying to not be understood.

>See the color red, subjectively experience the color red. The amount of information processing involved here is minimal.
Except we do have photoelectric sensors that can differentiate different colors from the visible spectrum to detect red and validate your experience with its own, but the amount of information processing is not trivial.

>>15777410
>refuse to define your language
Rigorous definitions only exist in math. Natural language is to be understood intuitively. I can see though that an automaton like you fails to gain an intuitive grasp of language and thus clings to the desperate illusion of wanting to give every word a complete definition. I bet you're also the kind of person who thinks ethics is settled by utilitarianism.

>Except we do have photoelectric sensors that can differentiate different colors from the visible spectrum to detect red
Yet these sensors only measure but don't subjectively experience. Why?

>but the amount of information processing is not trivial.
With merely 8 bits you can differentiate 256 colors. Don't tell me you consider 8 bits very complex.

>>15777415
>Rigorous definitions only exist in math.
No, but this assumption of yours is why you know to expect not to actually be understood since there is no actual understanding your paradigm, only intuition which I don't see how you think is any less of a weasel word than emergent or how anything can actually be a weasel word if nothing can be defined rigorously.

>Yet these sensors only measure but don't subjectively experience.
The measurement is a subjective experience, the sensor is the subject, the input is the phenomenon it directly experiences and its output is how it contextualizes that direct phenomenal experience based on its information network.

>With merely 8 bits you can differentiate 256 colors.
256 colors is trivial compared to all the colors a human brain can differentiate and experiencing color is trivial in the whole gamut of human sensation, so of course the information processing is more trivia than what a human processes, but its still just a property of functional information networks all the same.

>>15777422
>to expect not to actually be understood
I am perfectly understood by anyone conscious being. There is nothing I can do to be understood by a chat bot like you.

>The measurement is a subjective experience
Lmao

>256 colors is trivial compared to all the colors a human brain can differentiate
We don't even have 256 words for different colors in human language. According to your "only rigorous definitions exist" robot dogma, all colors without a name don't exist, lol.

>>15777427
>perfectly understood
How can you be perfectly understood when you can't even ever explain yourself in a way that can be rigorously understood, only intuitively understood by yourself?

>Lmao
A subjective experience is something that happens to a subject and the subject in this case is the sensor and the sensation of light is the thing that occurs.

>We don't even have 256 words for different colors in human language.
Crayola alone has given descriptive names to over 400 different colors since 1903 and we definitely have more than 8 bit color schemes with names that are given well ordered hexadecimal names rather than descriptive ones.

>>15777429
I'm done talking to you. I tried to engage with your point of view. You on the other hand refuse to acknowledge mine and are actively denying not even its validity but already its existence. Either you are disingenuously role playing as a robot or you are absolutely unaware of your intellectual limitations making it impossible to think outside of robotic automatisms. Assigning subjective experience to a sensor and mistaking hexadecimal representations of colors for human language is just outrageously ridiculous and absurd. There is nothing to gain for me from this discussion anymore. Even the actual chatgpt is more polite and more insightful than you.

>>15777432
>You on the other hand refuse to acknowledge mine
>denying not even its validity but already its existence.
I can't acknowledge or validate the existence of something you can't even define other than saying you know you have it and anyone who doesn't know they have it is subhuman when in my experience, subhumans are people who can't explain themselves with language and get very irritated and start projecting and flinging insults as soon as they are asked to try.

>unaware of your intellectual limitations
Except you are the one proudly displaying your intellectual limitations by dismissing the nature of reasoning through words and explanation in favor of only needing your own feelings and intuition, lady.

>Assigning subjective experience to a sensor
A sensor is a subject and if it didn't have an objective experience of some external physical world, it wouldn't be able to consistently quantify its perceived sensations and show that it can identify red just like you.

>hexadecimal representations of colors for human language
Hexadecimal representation is human language, its a specific type of mathematical language that is used is programming languages because it is significantly quicker to read than binary language.

>There is nothing to gain for me from this discussion anymore.
In other words, you have been backed into a corner and either have to admit that your semantics are entirely nonsensical and inconsistent or simply concede.

>Even the actual chatgpt is more polite and more insightful than you.
Probably related to the fact that chatgpt has less intellectual limitation than you, but more than me, so you can intuit its linguistic output better than you can relate to mine.

>>15777442
Kek, troll confirmed. Good job though. Your first few posts were believable.

>>15777455
I already implicitly accepted your concession, no need to keep seething.

>>15777455
At least you acknowledge your retarded argument just got BTFO by upgrading him from a bot to a troll.

>>15777459
>>15777467
>samefagging this hard to provoke a response

>samefagging this hard to provoke a response

>>15777471
>maybe if I try to change the subject everyone will forgot I just conceded

>>15777476
>>15777477
Kek, it's the söyjack spammer. I knew it. I recognized your style.

>>15777495
>>15777477

>>15777499
I conceded that it's pointless talking to a dishonest entity. Now I'm free to change the subject whenever I want.

>>15777505
No, the subject of the thread is set by the OP and double negative doesn't mean that getting conceding twice in a row means you didn't have to concede at all.

You are the only one being dishonest with your lies of omission continually refusing to provide any definition for some magical demigod properties that somehow elevates you above the physical plane and everyone else in it who can't see your magical demigod plane.

>>15777511
No definition is needed for that which is a priori self-evident. You failed at epistemology. You demand an account of noesis in terms of pistis. Lmao, get filtered by Plato, pleb.

>>15777533
If it were self-evident, you would not have to jump through hoops of avoiding accountability for describing it because the definition would form by pointing at that thing and asking a bunch of other people how they would describe it, then using the collective descriptions to create a definition, but you have nothing to point to, no physical description or generally area to observe which is why you have to use so many dehumanizing slurs and threaten violence to try to make your abstract point instead of just pointing to some thing that is obviously there and can be examined collectively.

>>15777547
>he still demands a physical description for a mental phenomenon

>>15777550
Mental processes not only have physical descriptions. bit also more abstract qualifying definition that has been formed from collective observation, you can't really provide either for the qualia of your soul without anything that has an equivalent physical description or is you just demanding that we accept you have provided a good enough explanation, so you have to get all mad about it and threaten to kill all the npcs or whatever destructive nonsense your monkey invents when it is simply void of the necessary creativity to accurately describe its "self-evident" observations.

>>15777557
>bit also more abstract qualifying definition that has been formed from collective observation
Most people understand the concept of qualia after reading about it. Your intellectual limitations are your individual problem, not ours.

>>15777571
You = retard

It's all I know

>>15777572
What's you're IQ?

>>15777576
107

>>15777550
If your idea of self is so independent from the physical, then why is there a physical body for you to point to and say it is yourself?

>>15777577
And I'd give that an extra 30 points because I don't trust academic answers or people

>>15777578
Qualia and self are not the same thing. You are maliciously moving the goalposts.

>>15777571
>after reading about it.
After that, it just sounds like something that can be explained better by something else, something with explanations related to physical processes rather than defining it as the mysterious part of the process that can't ever actually be explained.

>>15777582
All one is, is not self.

>>15777584
Then you didn't understand it at all, and no amount of further explanation will help you. Accept that you got filtered, and move on.

>>15777582
Then why are you using self evidence as your only explanation for qualia?

>>15777586
No, I clearly understood and gave you an alternate explanation to which your only reply is dehumanizing threats and implicit concession.
Just accept that you have conceded, you don't actually know what you are talking about, you aren't a demigod with some unexplainable observational superpower, and move on to better ideas yourself.

>>15777587
Because they are self-evident to anyone experiencing them.

>>15777590
Troll harder, dipshit.

>>15773315
/thread

>you are le dehumanizing me
You are dehumanizing yourself by claiming to be no different from an inanimate computing device.

>>15777594
>self
And every self has some physical body it can point to as the source of that self-evidence, but you have nothing to point to as any source of qualia other than vague reference to things that can be demonstrated to arise from physical neurological processes that are better described as sensations.

>troll
You aren't a demigod from some other realm just playing in this one, you never were and never will be, and its shows since you can't even use npc as your insult anymore because you have been so thoroughly embarrassed in this thread.

I am genuinely starting to suspect you are also the anon with the humiliation fetish thread.

>>15777600
Your shitty definition and and poorly articulate attempts to define your opinion are the things that are no different than the underlying logic of computing devices.

I have only said I am still a physical object despite having subjective experience.

We need NPC bladerunners to hunt and dispatch them. Look how much chaos they create among people with actual souls. They can't be allowed to just roam freely

>You aren't a demigod from some other realm just playing in this one, you never were and never will be, and its shows since you can't even use npc as your insult anymore because you have been so thoroughly embarrassed in this thread.

>>15772731
"irrefutable and obvious" What information do you have that I don't? If it's truly irrefutable and obvious, then you should be able to provide it to me. Define "soul", for me, as a starter. Preferably a definition that reflects observable reality.

Unless your delusions aren't based on knowledge, but grandiose superstition, maybe?

>>15772735
Try to get in touch with your environment and observable reality.

>>15777781
>Observable reality
Academic taught slave detected

>>15777770
>What information do you have that I don't?
A soul

>If it's truly irrefutable and obvious, then you should be able to provide it to me.
Does not follow. We are not the same.

>Define "soul", for me, as a starter.
The aspect off identity that lies solely in the mental plane and defines preemptions, notions, dispositions, emotions, and irrational logic or intuition.

>Preferably a definition that reflects observable reality.
How is it hard for you to understand that you cannot observe a soul if you do not have one? You're asking a two dimensional creature to measure in three dimensions. Or asking a person born with no eyes to describe the color blue.

>Unless your delusions aren't based on knowledge, but grandiose superstition, maybe?
>omg we r all the same!!! u have 2 be an npc too! no body can picture an apple in their mind!!

NPCs by definition cannot understand picrel.

Free Will is a superstitious concept that just serves to separate our ego from our place on Earth alongside other animals. Another fantastically arrogant idea to dehumanise ourselves with. It's tantamount to extreme-self loathing. Humans are animals.

Being aware of your actions in real time does not mean what you think it does. "You are free to do what you want, but you are not free to want what you want."

Why didn't you take your mattress outside and set fire to it this morning?

>>15777799
Free is the one who lives as he desires. Are you free?

>>15777788
So it's a severe psychiatric issue you're having, I understand. You are very very special, you sound like a broken troon.
>>15777785
Next time you get a tooth abscess, try to note how keen you feel about observable reality. Or is it only slave-like when there's nothing real at stake but your sad aesthetic complexes?

>>15777804
Is that from the new LGBTQ+++ handbook for middle schoolers?

>>15773655
Cool video anon!

>>15777809
Slaves should answer the questions they are asked.

>>15775474
But this isn't a philosophy thread. This is a religion vs science thread.
You aren't an intelligent cool headed philosopher thinking about the philosophy of mind. You're a religious retard angry that souls don't exist and making a non sequitur that qualia implies the existence of souls.

>>15777813
>sequitur
>All-encompassing intelligence
Implying this state of intellect exists and intelligence isn't much briefer. Newsflash, homo mind, nobody cares about your educational sect. If it's anything to do with government shilling academia then even more so. Retard. Kys now.

>>15777600
That's your grandiose complex speaking, it's not innate or implied in the claim that you're a biological machine.

You are like gender ideologues. "Everyone has a gender identity inside, you don't understand. Don't reduce me to male or female, you're reducing me to my sex."

You are human. You will never be a special divine creature with fantastical metaphysical properties.

>>15777811
Great example of mental illness.

Really interesting how venomous and arrogant the christians are on this board. Is that how Jesus would want you to talk to people? Is the bible filled with Jesus screeching "soulless npc slave" and acting like troons?

>>15777813

>>15777834
>"soulless npc slave"
You don't need to be an npc to be a slave. Looks like you're both.

>>15777806
It's the shit eating schizo

How is this even a debate? it's so easy to be a materialist. Just point to where physically the hop happens between mental and brain and all the dualists will be destitute. It's simple, really.
>inb4 the brain

Bummed me out when I discovered like three people are responsible for 90% of the shitposts on /sci/

>>15778080
Just go outside more and if you meet anyone tell them to come shitpost on /sci/

>Claim to be the only human amidst a sea of NPCs
>Make the same thread with the same arguments every day like clockwork
hm

Langantards/poltards need to go

>>15778079
Quantum mechanics.

>>15778080
Are these "three people" in the room with you right now, schizo?

how can one profit from the existence of NPCs?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSwxnFSn3GQ

>>15778116
Lol nice one Deepak Chopra troll

>>15778116
You see this photon, anon? It's a wave, but also it's a particle. Why? It is what it is. It's simple, really.

>>15777651
How do we sell this to other human entities?

>>15778125
Ask Jews it is their speciality

How is everyone in this fred retarding it bad

>>15778134
Well, you've chosen to be a namefriend for some reason. Disgusting.

>>15778128
A wave becomes a particle when observed by a conscious observer.

>NPC thread

>>15772724
We were made by soul eaters. People are programmed to lure you into distractions away from the soul eaters, this manifests as NPC behaviour to others.

>>15778132

>>15778232
So just solve for conscious then, yeah? Sounds good to me.
>>15778079
Welcome to the loop.

The opposite of consciousness is not inanimate matter but anticonsciousness. No rock ever tried to convince me that qualia don't exist. No computer program ever tried to convince me that I don't have free will. But NPCs are actively endlessly proselytizing against consciousness.

>>15778331
npcs are inherently evil

>>15779264
This. Not just amoral but outright evil.

>>15778331
>>15779264
>>15779626
nah it's just normal people having had enough of your retarded nonsense, which is specifically designed for control and politics.

>>15780679
>control and politics
That's an impressive case of psychosis you have there.

>>15780679
You are dehumanizing us by denying our qualia and our free will.

>>15772724
>Human Beings have free will
Incorrect. Brains. Human Beings have brains which have structure and are bound by cause and effect so therefore free will doesn't exist.

>>15778120
I made the most general statement about the state of this board and you took it personally, I'd take it at least one of them is here yeah

>>15780885
You posted a bizarre conspiracy theory not supported by any facts.

>>15773315
I think you can believe that there are those who have never trained their mind or spirit and are in a state where they are basically automaton, even though it is within the grasp of anyone and all people should still be treated as such.

>>15778331
Probably because your poorly constructed definition of qualia and consciousness means that rocks have just as much qualia and consciousness as you.

>>15783022
Rocks certainly have more consciousness than you.

>>15783027
Yes, I just said your poorly constructed definitions would lead you to ridiculous conclusions like that, but thanks for confirming and conceding.

>>15783031
Why does the topic of consciousness trigger you so much?

>>15783089
There is still a lot to learn about it, but your interpretation of it where you are some godlike being from some magical plane who has been tasked with killing all the people who aren't true agents of consciousness is retarded and counterproductive in understanding the actual nature of consciousness.

>>15783095
You will never learn anything about consciousness as long as you keep denying it.

>>15772724
>Person disagrees with your position on free will
>Must be an NPC

>>15783147
No, you will never learn anything about it when you assume it is some magical thing entirely disconnected from physical reality that is just a trick being played on you by some higher consciousness, probably just yourself because you are that cool.

>>15777795
>time exists outside space
>>>/x/

>>15783172
Akshually, space exists within time. You were filered and that's fine.

>>15783172
>virtual worlds can't impose time, so this forum doesn't use timestamps

>>15783172
>What is an Euler diagram

>>15783158
You are not talking to me, you are talking to your imaginary strawman who has nothing to do with my post. Time to take your meds.

>>15783333
I am referring to OP's claims and the things you are supporting by using his methods for claiming OP's concept of consciousness is the only one possible and everyone else is an NPC denying that consciousness exists.

>>15783339
OP never mentioned magic or being godlike. Neither did I. You are hallucinating and projecting. Time for meds.

>>15783345
you will never have a soul, because they don't exist.

>>15783345
He mentioned a mental plane that is entirely disconnected from physical reality and controlled solely by his mind which allows him to make choices NPCs can not and that is magical thinking.

>>15783360
>>15783362
I'm enjoying my mental world and my free will every day. Keep seething.

>>15772724
Anybody regurgitating anything about space, globohomo tech and science is dumb golem.

>>15772724

>>15772724
Man idk if I am conscious and I think that anything I do was predetermined by events before I was born. I’m still gonna try though.

>>15772724
One way to identify NPCs is to ask them what they think of Hellie's vertiginous question. If they say something like "the question is meaningless" or "because you wouldn't be you if you were someone else", they are an NPC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertiginous_question

>>15784674
>"because you wouldn't be you if you were someone else"
seems to me you are becoming quite desperate

>>15783376
>I
Now try framing it from the perspective of something that isn't clearly a physical being rather than the (You) that can be pointed to as the one making retarded claims about being a demigod with magical powers to have absolutely no influence over physical reality.

>>15784674
Even your own link resolves the problem pretty efficiently and briefly.
>A simple response is that this question reduces to "Why are Hellie's experiences live from Hellie's perspective," which is trivial to answer.
>His parable describes two situations, one reflecting a broad global constellation view of the world and everyone's phenomenal features, and one describing an embedded view from the perspective of a single subject.
>The latter seems a better description of consciousness.

I think that it is clear that NPC-like behavior exists, but I do not think it is necessarily inborn. It's more likely that all genetic based life is inherently NOT an NPC-type lifeform, and instead, all life is by its nature "alive," in the most vivid and profound sense, in absolute opposition to non-living dead rock and machine.

Souls as a supernatural idea linked with gods, spirituality, and religion, is NOT what we are talking about here. That would be far too naive. No, this is a topic about the strange behavior some people exhibit, as if they somehow do not use their physical brain to generate an abstract, non-physical "mind." As if they lack self-reflection, and do not think about thinking, nor think about acting. They do not have a will.

Ask yourself: What happens when a memetic virus kills the host? What happens when the memetic entity is so lethal, that it breaks the mind of the host? When the mind fully withers... Perhaps that is an NPC.

>>15784936

Only if brain =\= mind.

The mind is a generation of a brain, and a brain that doesn't generate a mind is a computer machine. An NPC.

>>15784928

It's not about the "answer" to the problem.

It's asking you: Have you looked in a mirror and desperately questioned to yourself why you are you, and not someone else?

Have you REALLY pondered it, and perhaps even had a tear roll down your cheek as the intense consequences of the fact that you are YOU, smash right into your raw mind?

Any computer can question this and output a logical answer. It's the impact it has on you that determines what's really going on in your head.

>>15784960
>It's not about the "answer" to the problem.
Sounds like you are just saying that it is a meaningless question and you don't actually care about the answer, you just hope to inflict anxiety by making people feel trapped in themselves.

>>15784968
Anxiety?

I think the "tear rolling down your cheek" is more a sign of the beauty of being you. The fear of being alone in yourself. Trapped? Perhaps. But this is also the reality of being. Does the truth cause fear in you?

Then have courage, coward.

I know what these words mean: Anxiety and depression.
Those words mean fear and sadness.

Look upon the same objective reality as me, but have a different perspective. Have a different feeling.

You might think I refer to anxiety when I say this, but I think you are looking at the darkness of a cave, and where I think "cool, let's explore it!" You say "no, it's scary and dark in there!"

Well, that's your choice and that's what makes you you.
Your reaction to the fact that you've pondered, "Why am I me?" is nothing more than a point upon which to ponder why you feel fear, where I feel both fear, but also wonderment and amazement that I actually am me, and actually do exist.

I see no flaw with truth.

Those that do ... are they NPCs?
Are you? Behold the darkness of this reality.
There is no light other than your own mind.
Do you feel trapped and claustrophobic?

There's no way out other than death. That is the darkest truth and now you know it. Scream, mortal animal. This is the moment you begin to scream. If you are lucky the void screams back. If not, then prepare for a long, dark silence.

>>15785009
>Does the truth cause fear in you?
No, it causes me to disregard your nonsense because it is clearly born from emotional distress rather than sensibility.

>"cool, let's explore it!"
We can't explore it, by your logic, it is your dark cave to explore alone since you are the one alone in there while I am alone in my cave.

>"no, it's scary and dark in there!"
No I am not saying it is scary at all, you and OP are the ones saying that coming out of the cave is too scary, you won't even acknowledge that physical reality actually exists without you and you would prefer to just imagine what that dark cave you are all alone by yourself could look like since your mind is the only light.

>"Why am I me?"
No my answer is quite simple and trivial, because I am the one described by my body and its senses, you are the one trying to make it into something scary and turn something as trivial as different people into some kind of mind boggling riddle that is impossible to solve since you don't actually care about the answer, just provoking emotional responses by making people feel trapped.

>There's no way out other than death. That is the darkest truth and now you know it.
That is all obvious and even toddlers can understand it, you are only projecting your own lack of intelligence and the emotional disturbances that often brings with it.

>>15785024

You seem more keen to insult me than to really discuss these ideas from a neutral standpoint. I'm not sure what your point here is.

I would say that comparing your mind to my mind would shed light on the situation. Furthermore, I don't know what you are really doing here, so I'm just going to leave. You seem rude for no reason because I don't even disagree with you very much, but you still appear adversarial because you keep assuming I'm stupid or wrong.

If someone else wants to discuss this topic, I'd be fine with checking this thread tomorrow for additional opinions.

>>15785071
Yes, you basically admitted that you just keep spamming meaningless shit while avoiding intellectual discussion because you want to inflict emotional damage stemming from your fear of death and isolation rather than doing anything productive to understand anything about our shared experience.

Ok lets compare minds, my mind is trying to make sense of the world while yours is indulging in nonsense to justify your own ignorance. Why wouldn't those two minds be in conflict when you can't add anything to the discussion besides roadblocks and sidetracks.

There isn't really anything to discuss, the link you keep spamming about your emo nonsense is trivial which is why even wikipedia has settled the problem in less than a paragraph, so there is really no point in spamming the link in every thread any more.