[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 52 KB, 590x350, consciousness-780905.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10449284 No.10449284 [Reply] [Original]

https://www.princeton.edu/~graziano/evolution_of_consciousness_2017.pdf

>> No.10449330

>>10449284
"We are not attempting to explain the content of consciousness, but instead how one gets to be conscious
of that content" that's in the introduction. Which mystery of consciousness are you referring to which was solved here? In my understanding the primary question is with what it is. Not how it got here. But probably how consciousness arises will be important somewhat in answering what it is.

>> No.10449406

>>10449284
>Consciousness MYSTERY SOLVED.
define "consciousness"

>> No.10449495

>>10449330
>"We are not attempting to explain the content of consciousness, but instead how one gets to be conscious of that content"
If you read the carefully, the "content of consciousness" he's referring to is "memories, thoughts, decisions, and sensory perceptions"

An example is an apple. You are aware of an apple. The apple is the content of which you are aware.

It's not a step-by-step way of producing consciousness but gives you an overview of how it works and early experimental results supporting this theory.

If you read the paper you realize what is solved. Especially 3.29.4

>> No.10449503

>>10449495
To add, it is step-by-step from a top down perspective but not a bottom up. (You won't be able to go out and create AI tomorrow after reading this)

>> No.10449609

>In today’s information world, there is no mystery about how a machine can have memories, make decisions, process sensory information, contain self-information, and so on.
1 sentence in and already an insane extrapolation. yes a machine can make a """""decision"""" (e.g. solve a minimisation problem with a meme network if necessary). but to recognise the necessity to make a decision is something completely different. in reality all computers decide is saying true or false to a decision a human already has coded in. a computer doesnt recognise the quality of a good or bad.

>> No.10449617

>>10449284
>evolution_of_consciousness_2017.pdf
>2017.pdf

>> No.10449658

>>10449609
>all computers decide is saying true or false to a decision a human already has coded in.

Implying we aren't biochemical machines with no free will.

>> No.10449753

>>10449609
This paper describes awareness as a highly developed but incomplete attention schema evolved gradually so as to better have control over attention itself (loss of schema/internal model = unstable and degraded ability for control).

It says right there at the end of the paper how humans have additional cognitive and linguistic layers of the brain that allows us to TALK and THINK about the nature of this consciousness

>1 sentence in...
l2read you fucking retard

>> No.10449770

>it's just the internal model of attention
makes sense to me

>> No.10449771

>>10449617
some of today's most prominent ideas about what consciousness is were developed in the 90s and 80s.

>> No.10449841

Thousands of years of philosophy condensed into a 9 page pdf.

>> No.10450163

Clearly consciousness is an ever-changing probability field which encompasses all other fields. We live in a probability dream. Within it consciousness tricks itself to believe that it is detached from it's infinite whole which is both nothingness and infinity. In other words, this universe is made of pure mathematics with both form and meaning. What you see in front of you and within you is meaning. You can even think of impossible probabilities, such as that of a self-originating consciousness that exists only within a physical brain. Coming back to the nature of pure consciousness, it is without form and so without origin. It just is the source. The source of probability itself.

>> No.10450266
File: 70 KB, 480x608, 3EFD74C1-CBA9-4071-B87E-DF4104DA3F75.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10450266

>>10449495

>> No.10450341

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkaFgVzzSWI

>> No.10450349

>>10450163
Desu I'm into Advaita Vedanta myself but the theory presented in the article makes a ton of sense if you understand it.

>> No.10450354

>>10450266
Durrrrr we cant KNOW anything but I still have my personal beliefs I'm not willing to change in light of new, more compelling evidence than that which I base my current beliefs on.

>> No.10450358

>>10450354
I meant to be Larping as you btw, if you couldn't tell.

>> No.10450588

Read it. Meaningless repetitive word vomit. Sage.

>> No.10450662

>>10449753
it is a shit paper. it makes giant leaps and assumptions and draws conclusions from that. reductionistic bullcrap

>> No.10450684
File: 678 KB, 1200x758, singularity pepe.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10450684

>>10449284
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBbFuudKAic

>> No.10450686

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui8oEvUwzkc

>> No.10450703

>>10449609
>insane extrapolation
..that you did yourself? they didn't do anything of the sort, their sentence is valid

>> No.10450741
File: 27 KB, 456x810, 1550814692490.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10450741

>>10450703
>..that you did yourself? they didn't do anything of the sort, their sentence is valid
you poor brainlett

>> No.10450744
File: 1.23 MB, 912x905, 4549fde1f847c7b5c40dde917a8ee745.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10450744

>>10449284
>STEMTARDS TRY TO THINK
AHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHHAHAAHHAHHH
GO BACK TO YOUR KEKSHED OF A LAB AND BE A GOOD OBEDIENT SLAVE, ITS ALL YOU CAN DO ANYWAY.

>> No.10450745
File: 30 KB, 552x630, 9sps1toefok21.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10450745

>>10449284
>It doesn't exist
Solved it, where's my Nobel?

>> No.10450865
File: 65 KB, 227x219, didntreadlol.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10450865

>>10450662
What giant leaps? Their paper is supported by examples from medical literature about the link between "awareness" and the ability to control attention deduced from damage to certain areas of the brain. It also gives evidence of evolution of said regions and limits of the conscious experience found in other species (comparative anatomy).

>> No.10450930

Consciousness isn't a mystery.

As long as neuroscience has been around, the general understanding is that's it's caused by a network of neurons sending, storing and receiving impulses, and that this evolved out of organisms that survived via neural-impulse improvement.

What kind of loons don't understand the "mind" is just a synonym for neurological activity, and that neurons are physical.

You do know your brain, when modified, affects your processes, right?

>> No.10451026
File: 877 KB, 1100x968, 1527966319846.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10451026

>>10450865
read again what you wrote. if that arent giant leaps then I dont know what is

>> No.10451421

Guys i just got a crazy idea, the humans mostly make the decisions on their survival instincts, like food reproduction water etc, if we put parameter to the AI, for example to make all its decisions based on how it will finds energy to.support itself what it would happen?

>> No.10451606

>>10450930
Where is the model you live inside?

>> No.10451650

>>10449658
This dude gets it.

>> No.10451693

>>10449658
Determinism doesn't preclude free will.

>> No.10451695 [DELETED] 

>>10449658
are you saying god coded all the decision into us already?

>> No.10451699

>>10449658
are you saying that we have all possible decisions hardcoded? and who did that?

>> No.10451708

>>10451693
Well, what is your definition of free will?
>>10451695
You don't need determinism to not have free will. Even in a world where randomness is a thing, free will can't happen.

>> No.10451710

>>10451699
Why did you delete your old post talking about god?

>> No.10451715

>>10451708
you are completely the actual issue if we follow your line of thought:
my claim:
>all computers decide is saying true or false to a decision a human already has coded in.
your claim:
>Implying we aren't biochemical machines with no free will.
and thus it follows that we already have all decision hardcoded. what are you saying to this?

>>10451710
because it was a grammatical abomination

>> No.10451724

>>10451715
>because it was a grammatical abomination
It still is.
Can you correct it?

>> No.10451796

>>10451708
>Well, what is your definition of free will?
Free will means you make your own choices; they aren't forced onto you by external actors or forces.