/sci/ - Science & Math

Magic

>>9553417
>What is consciousness?
A meaningless notion.

mushrooms

now

pseudoscience bullshit

>>9553417
Self awareness and apparent control of your "person"

>>9553704
So non-human animals don't have consciousness?

>>9553729
I put person in quotations like that to mean your body. The experience of being self aware requires a body of some sort.

You know the expression - "do you have any weapons about your person?"

Person meaning body.
Animals do have consciousness I believe. I can't see why they wouldn't, at the end of the day the arrangement of molecules in your brain is what causes consciousness, and animals generally have similar brain systems so the assumption that the brains of animals CANNOT somehow be self aware is quite far-fetched.

>>9553417
nothing, it doesn't exist you stupid fags
we aren't "conscious" we are merely aware - there is nothing more, there is no "link"
we are not even the electrical impulses of our brain
we ARE the water, fat, axons, neurons, salts, FOLDS AND SHAPS of our brain. THAT
the physicality of our brain IS our essence
EVERYONE is so STUPID on this
we cannot upload, download or anything
we are the salt boundaries and gradients trapped in a mayo-like emulsion of fat and dirty water.
that's IT
that's US
that's EGO
motherfucking cock choking big-thought fagging gravy-train chugging nigger philosophers.
THERE IS NO BIG QUESTION OF CONSCIOUSNESS
You could say the biggest trick consciousness ever made was convincing us it existed
Free will? it's just brownian motion and like trying to steer a rope - it only seems strange BECAUSE OUR LIMITED MINDS THINK IT'S STRANGE
it's really nothing important
we are a dirty little sploge of mayo inside a calcium shell
stop fagging this shit

>>9553780
Guessing you don't like AI then? Well, we will see if (((consciousness))) is reproducible after all in about 150 years or so.

>>9553780
Okay then mr brainbox, how did consciousness arise? There was a point in time where no life existed, and thus nor did consciousness so where did it come from?

Uhhhhhhhh
>doesn't understand how evolution can create more and more complex organisms

Ooh idk maybe it developed? Meaning it is fully reproducible. It's just a matter of time and learning until we can create consciousness artificially.

>>9553780
This is the peak /sci/ poster.

>Assert that your shitty underdeveloped identity theory is true, without giving any arguments for why it is, refusing to tackle any of the mysteries about consciousness brought up in phil of mind

>>9553798
U replied to wrong guy. Urself instead.

>>9554745
I can answer you but you must specify if we talking hard or easy problem brother. Mashala.

>>9553780
You must be 18 or older to post, anon

>>9553787
lol ai is a meme
first, people don't even know what intellect is
second, they don't even know what questions to ask
the work i do in deep learning, algos and shit, i like that
you don't think i want the most intelligence to exist as possible?
weirdo commie nigger

>>9553798
it didn't you stupid shit
we're nothing more than a greasy mayo that thinks we're conscious - plants have pretty much the same senses as us - are they conscious?
so you mean high consciousness? how hi?
draw a line
wait, better yet, define consciousness - the dictionary says a mushroom is conscious
so you're really telling me that a chemical bag that cannot define the word conscious is supposed to be conscious?
there is NO BIG MYSTERY
our consciousness (i didn't say it didn't exist you nigger, I just said you, YOU, don't even know if it is exists, you lazily presume it does) is nothing more than the physiological reality of the water and fat in our skull - nothing more - we're like snes cartridges. a SNES with a camera, robot arm and light gun, and maybe power glove.
that's it.
there is nothing magical. any blah blah advance, indistinguishable blah magic.
how about: anything we don't sufficiently understand is magic
that's why there's all this bullshit thinking about consciousness - there is nothing special about it.
YOU ACCEPT THAT WE LITERALLY INVENTED COLORS IN OUR FUCKING WET GREASY FATTY GRAY SACKS
BUT YOU THINK THAT TRAINS OF THOUGHT ARE MAGICAL?
YOU ACCEPT THAT WE CAN SMELL ROSES
BUT YOU THINK REMEMBERING YOUR OWN NAME IS MAGICAL?
YOU ACCEPT THAT WE CAN WATCH ANIME, BUT YOU THINK SELF DOUBT IS A MYSTERY?
YOU ACCEPT THAT YOUR MOM CAN TASTE DICK, BUT BEING ABLE TO THINK IS SOME MAGICAL IDEA?
YOU FUCKING RETARDED NIGGER

>>9554866
your mom gay

>>9553417
A vague label of many more complex and fundamental processes.

>>9554792
Hit me up on that hard problem solution.

>>9553417

Self-referential feedback loop, contaminated by emotional bias and an imprecise memory storage system.

>>9553417

It's what you're doing when you're not asleep or dead.
Seems pretty obvious to me

>>9555402
>Can you explain what a star is?
>It's the thing in the sky

>Can you explain what a car is
>It's what drives on a road

Some fucking powerful explanatory power there buddy.

>>9555404

Some things don't need to be explained is the point I guess.
If you're alive you understand what it is to be conscious.
It's simply implicit.

You all suck. I am unironically the best pster here. Mods suck my cock.

>>9553417

a feedback loop

>>9553780
>>>/pol/

>>9553417
a global neuronal workspace

>>9555456

>>9553417

real answer:
NO ONE REALLY FUCKING KNOWS

>>9555927
Can you tell me why though?

>>9555408
Thats the most fucking stupid attitude ive ever heard. Its literallu the same as that guy said. You have no justifcation to say that about consciousness as opposed to gravity.

Youre a fucking idiot.

>>9555393
I have no solution but say it is an epistemic problem of a subjective conscious agent, not an ontological one. All observations are confined within a (biological) context. Makes it paradoxical to make universal statements or explain certain things.

I say to you we have the same problem with physical things. What is matter or energy? What is their substance? Their definitions are completely functional. You can explain the world without a substance. Its all in constructs defined by interactions (which defines the easy problem in the brain). The hard problem is, metaphysically what is or how do we define this substance of matter. Or even is there one? We cant explain it by science because it uses interactional models. Completely functional. About prediction. Not substance. Cant prove anything.

Do you see what i mean?

We have a hard problem of matter as well as consciousness and from that view and the irrelevance of mental or physical "substance" to any scientific predictions then they are irrelevant problems. Science cant deal with them because it doesnt prove metaphysical things. Just relations between man made contructs i.e. particle or wave? Construct based on experience. And the meaningful thin about it? The equations... the relations.

Do you see what i mean?

And desu via p-zombie argument i think qualia is functionally inevitable. P-zombies would say they have qualia and why not. They are inference machines. Saying they dont have qualia is like saying they have no data to make inferences on.

Do you see what i mean?

>>9553417
a spook

>>9555393
If what i said in that long mssage is unclear, then i say, tell me.. what is matter? What is energy. You can tell me what it does in relation to other constructs like space or force or work (the latter two themselves are tautologous) but what are they? Matter in particular. There has to be something there to make interactions so what is it and how would we define it without referring to relations. We cant even measure it without that. We measure things by their consequences and behaviour e.g. perturbing a field etc etc.

Ive diverged again but yes.

What is matter and why? Isnt that a hard problem?

>>9555412
so refrigerators are conscious then

How would we know if say the Google network of servers were conscious? What makes us think it would want to talk or care about things like that?

>>9557286
real answer:
there's no such thing as consciousness
we're just sensory lifeforms, basic cognition, recall, fine motors skills
we're so dumb we think all that adds up to something magical
pathetic
we were wowed by iphones remember
and the same brain we're going to assume isn't wowed by something that we label "consciousness" but secretly talk about it being some higher state of elevated being like we have some deep thinking going on?
no, we're all surface
WE ARE ALL SURFACE
THERE IS NO FUCKING MYSTERY

>>9558272
they can't think
> energy
energy doesn't exist - like evolution science is quickly and silently revising it's own history on energy - decades of wrong teaching. energy is a label that proves how dumb we are.
more proof: 80% of top google results of entropy use the word up-side down, and it increase when they talk about high, low, increasing or decreasing entropy - 90% of all sites, explanations use the term incorrectly
evolution: used incorrectly, defined incorrectly, and now dawkins and others are silently redefining and wiping decades of dumb-as-shit incorrect teachings and definitions of evolution. they are morons, they religified (sic) evolution, showing their brain weaknesses
time: more proof - morons that talk about time without defining it - decades of incorrect talk on time, the common response is "well it's there in the numbers" to "it's a helper word" (like energy) - but they are desperate all to try and now work out if it exists (read the news on this) as it was a blind spot in knowledge - everyone assuming someone else knew - morons all
now you're going to say these morons, all of them morons, have a consciousness? why? because it's beyond your thinking?
SUGAR is beyond people's thinking.
The liver is beyond people's thinking.
Energy is beyond people's thinking.
Time is beyond people's thinking.
Evolution is beyond people's thinking. (get ready for the rick and morty crowd to go ackshually on this)
WE SHOULD BE SPENDING OUR _TIME_ TALKING ABOUT HOW OUR MINDS ARE WEAK AND HOW THAT RELATED TO OUR PERCEPTION OF "CONSCIOUSNESS" NOT VAIN, WEAK, IMPOTENT DISCUSSIONS ON WHAT "IT" IS.

do you retards know what google is?

>>9560307
100% of your post is nothing more than mere assertions, all the while claiming to have the intellectual high ground. Are you sure you're not the Rick and Morty fan here?