/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11571150]

Universal consciousness flows through capacitors to create compartmentalized nodes of consciousness (like you or me). Help me expand this idea.

[Anonymous No.11571165]

>>11571150
This problem has been recently solved by WolframAlpha™ (patents pending)

[Anonymous No.11571238]

https://discord.gg/FFwRXKq

[Anonymous No.11571242]

dEfInE cOnScIoUsNeSs

[Anonymous No.11571255]

>>11571150
YEah dude maaaan lightning is like one huge conscious being that is so shortlived maaan

[Anonymous No.11571277]

>>11571150
There's no expanding to be made, you gotta accept the fact that humans are just physical structures, we are not special. The fact that you linger on the thought that we somehow interact with physics in a special way is your downfall.

[Anonymous No.11571294]

>>11571277
what if everything interacts with physics in a special way?

[Anonymous No.11571300]

>>11571294
That would be called the normal way

[Anonymous No.11571309]

>>11571300
Everything is normal only because everything is special. The specialness cancels out to create a normal synthesis of reality. Do you not think it is strange that you are only you and no one else?

[Anonymous No.11571373]

>>11571309
That's off-topic, you don't understand the point. Physics as we have it is a good tool for an approximation of reality. Do you understand the 90 year old Dirac equation? Start with what we have. If everything interacts with physics in a special way, the existing system is not good enough. And the new system would become normal.
Assuming some weird structure beyond current physics, the burden of proof is on you, and without a proof, we'll apply occams razor.

[Anonymous No.11571420]

>>11571373
Not interested. Mechanistic explanations of reality bore me.

[Anonymous No.11571430]

what kind of capacitors? brain wave conscious field interactors located at the aft of the pineal gland maaan?

[Anonymous No.11571481]

>>11571430
invisible ones

[Anonymous No.11571486]

Read Itzhak Bentov and practice the Gateway Method:
https://medium.com/accessible-foia/analysis-assesment-gateway-process-army-cia-foia-1983-human-consciousness-d7fa332ef404

[Anonymous No.11571532]

>>11571242
t. brainlet stuck in the 50s
Logical positivism and behaviorism died decades ago anon. You should always learn the basics of a subject before you weigh in on it.

>>11571150
This is kind of like an alternative take on neutral monism OP.

>>11571420
This is because you are a brainlet. Mechanistic explanations can coexist with "mysticism" or "idealism". In fact a lot of great mathematicians and other scientists have been quite sympathetic to shit like Platonism , deism, pantheism, etc.
You actually can't even fully appreciate speculative metaphysics if you don't fully understand the rationalist attempt to understand the mathematical structures that underlay empirical phenomenon. In fact, the origins of all of western esotercism and mysticism lie in the proto-rationalism of the Ancient Greek mathematicians and philosophers associated with the Pythagorean and Platonic schools.

[Anonymous No.11571922]

>>11571309
I am only me and not someone else because my memories are stored in my brain. If I were to become someone else and then go back to me I wouldn't remember it because memories are physical things stored in the brain.

[Anonymous No.11571926]

>>11571150
What if

We are fractal fragments of the universal consciousness, rather than compartmentalized nodes or capacitors. Our own consciousness both mirrors and is a part of the universal consciousness. Perhaps it is this recursive feedback loop (of us both being a part of something as well as it's own reflection) that is necessary for the universal consciousness to exist in the 1st place.

[Anonymous No.11571933]

>>11571922
>my memories are stored in my brain
prove it

[Anonymous No.11572597]

>>11571150
I can hear the tinnitus that doesn't appear when I turn off all electricity devices or run without them in a forrest.

[Anonymous No.11573060]

>>11571277
Blindly accepting flawed (only internally consistent) science to the point of rejecting the most immediate and obvious truth--free will--is the downfall of many. The fact free will exists demands a flaw somewhere profound in physics and our basic understanding of the universe. Computer brains just step out and say it doesn't exist and equate that with materialism, as if materialism itself somehow is opposed to free will. It is a lack of imagination, curiosity, and basic human spirit that keeps computer brains from at least entertaining the interesting idea....IF free will exists, HOW!? It is a profound mystery.

[Anonymous No.11573097]

WOAH DUDE I just LOVE talking about CONSCIOUSNESS. What a MIND STIMULATING subject that science STILLS struggles to answer. Only TRUE INTELLECTUALS can comprehend how DEEP of a subject this is. It could be ANYTHING. WAVE FRACTALS, or CAPACITORS, or BRAIN WAVE FUNCTIONS, or WAVE PARTICAL DUALTY.

DUDE this is the ULTIMATE source to free FREE WILL

DUDE don't we sound SO SMART?????

[Anonymous No.11573100]

>>11571532
>>>11571242 #
>t. brainlet stuck in the 50s
>Logical positivism and behaviorism died decades ago anon. You should always learn the basics of a subject before you weigh in on it.
>>>11571150 (OP) #
>This is kind of like an alternative take on neutral monism OP.
>>>11571420 #
>This is because you are a brainlet. Mechanistic explanations can coexist with "mysticism" or "idealism". In fact a lot of great mathematicians and other scientists have been quite sympathetic to shit like Platonism , deism, pantheism, etc.
>You actually can't even fully appreciate speculative metaphysics if you don't fully understand the rationalist attempt to understand the mathematical structures that underlay empirical phenomenon. In fact, the origins of all of western esotercism and mysticism lie in the proto-rationalism of the Ancient Greek mathematicians and philosophers associated with the Pythagorean and Platonic schools.

[Anonymous No.11573105]

>>11573097
>>11573100
Yes dudes! I love having these pseudo-intellectual discussions!!!! I have so much source info from reddit that I'd love to share!!!

[Anonymous No.11573112]

>>11573097
>>11573105
literally retarded

sub 90

its bad

[Mary No.11573115]

>>11571150
Consciousness doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.11573120]

>>11573115
>Consciousness doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.11573130]

>>11571277
That's where you're wrong, faggot. Interactionist dualism makes a lot more sense than reductive physicalism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXX-_G_9kww
http://cogprints.org/6613/1/Dualism0409.pdf

[Anonymous No.11573132]

>>11571150
>Universal consciousness

Relevant:
https://opentheory.net/2018/09/a-new-theory-of-open-individualism/

[Anonymous No.11573134]

>That's where you're wrong, faggot!!!!!! Interactionist dualism makes a lot more sense than reductive physicalism!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.11573150]

>>11573134
not that anon, but...
>posting soi bois can be used to argue anything, including posting soi bois

Plz post more soi boi in response to this to prove me correct.

[Anonymous No.11573151]

>>11571150
You can’t just say words and expect them to be of any value scientifically.

[Anonymous No.11573164]

>>11573150
Seethe

>>11573151
Dilate

[Anonymous No.11573226]

>>11571532
Use Pythagoras again to talk about your esoteric bullshit and I will hunt you down you degenerated faggot

[Anonymous No.11573234]

>>11573226
>Use Pythagoras again to talk about your esoteric bullshit and I will hunt you down you degenerated faggot!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.11573281]

>>11571165
You can't patent product of nature, or DNA that is naturally occurring.

[Anonymous No.11573453]

>>11571926
Bro what the fuck do you mean by consciousness?? Like self awareness?? How can you even calculate self awareness?? What you're saying is totally incoherent in the normal definitions of those words you're using. Please set up your terms man, write a book with all your new words and constructs and how they fit into other, existing constructs in detail, please.

[Anonymous No.11573466]

>>11573226
>He doesn't know Pythagoras ran a mystery school
Anon I ....

[Anonymous No.11573473]

>>11573453
He's a based schizo

[Anonymous No.11573733]

>>11573130
>the massive hypergalactic brain is "just give up bro"

[Anonymous No.11573758]

>go on /lit/
>large population of coping mathlets
>get soijaks for implying the slightest hint of respect for science
>go on /sci/
>large population of coping booklets
>get soijaks for implying the slightest hint of respect for philosophy
>there's nowhere left to look for signs of intelligence

[Anonymous No.11573779]

>>11573281
Except you can.

[Anonymous No.11573781]

>>11571150
I can't tell what you're trying to say.
Does "universal consciousness" exist in physical space? Sounds like it, if it's "flowing through" people, who exist in physical space.
Is it a vast uniform field such that any two identical physical structures have identical experiences? Then in what sense does it flow?
If it's not uniform, are some humans more conscious than others?
Can you transition between a zombie and a conscious person by walking around?
Would this transition alter a person's behavior? If so, why has such a thing never been observed?
If not, and physical events cause mental events but not vice versa, then why does your physical body type up posts theorizing about consciousness when consciousness has no way to influence this behavior?

[Anonymous No.11574093]

>>11573097
Kek

[Anonymous No.11574094]

>>11573758
Who are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.11574098]

>>11571150
You sound like a complete pseudointellectual desperate to fluff his words to sound smart

Total brainlet post

[Anonymous No.11574146]

All this homoerotic intellectualism is what keeps me coming back to this existential sausage-fest.

[Anonymous No.11574206]

>>11574094
No one? Other than the quoted bits of the OP

[Anonymous No.11574215]

>>11574206
Why not quote me instead? Many people have told me that I'm very quotable.

[Anonymous No.11574241]

>>11574215
Oh shit I misread which post you were replying to before. My actual response is that I'm quoting reality.
But I'd be happy to quote you as well anon. If you can come up with a good quote, I'll quote it for you.

[Anonymous No.11574248]

>>11574241
From many to one; thus we become the moment translated as fun.

[Anonymous No.11574264]

>>11574248
Very nice, anon. I enjoy the tasteful assonance. But I confess I don't quite understand what it means.
One last thing before I get down to business. Would you like attribution for this quote, or should I leave the author as Anonymous?

[Anonymous No.11574292]

>>11574264
Why would I ever want to be found for it? To that which has value I would never want to be identified as the source for that would diminish it forever more.

Besides, what joy could be found in people being able to identify me in the first place?

[Anonymous No.11574387]

>yeah, consciousness could the result of convoluted variations in the quantum entanglement of space time and quantum foam. At the sub atomic level, flux capacitors create a flow of electro magnetism that boost consciousness undertones in the human brain. Therefore it seems free will is up to the mercy of space time.

This is what you consciousness brainlets sound like

[Anonymous No.11574575]

>>11571150
>>11571277
The idea that consciousness simply emerges from the complex electro-chemical reactions in the brain just doesn't make sense. No one who subscribes to that idea can ever give an explanation for how it emerges. It might as well be magic.

The idea that consciousness is some fundamental aspect of reality like time and space at least solves the issue of where it comes from, though there is no material evidence for such a thing.

[Anonymous No.11574588]

>>11574575
How the hell would you touch raw consciousness and be aware of what you were touching?

[Anonymous No.11574605]

>>11574575
>Simply

That's almost like saying that this post emerges from simple electrical interactions between specially designed chemical components, you are not right but not wrong either since you are simply ignored the rest of the physical interactions that happen in the background, yet claiming that simply because they are background interaction it means there must be a metaphysical element to it is an illusion, we can go down and point out every single element that interacted with another element to produce this post because we built the system, the difference with conscioussness is that it's given or accidental(wathever).

I would argue that the real problem is that we are perfectly capable of following simple casual and linear interaction but as soon a we find a network of more than a certain number of elements it's just noise to us, a limitation of the human mind much in the same way that we say there 5 balls in a heap of balls but as soon as there are 50 we say there are simply many balls and the only way to break this is to start separating balls from the heap and counting them, aka put the problem in our level of understanding. For consciousness the problem still applies, we can't explain emergence just the different stages and the elements that interact between each other to produce a more complex system but the process between each level of complexity is... noise, for consciousness it's the same, denying it's inexistence for being unable of explaining the how is the equivalent of denying the existence of complex emergent ecosystems because we can't build the network of interactions that resulted in the ecosystem, therefore there must be something metaphysical behind it's creation that we can't explain through material methods.

[Anonymous No.11574706]

>>11574575
>The idea that consciousness simply emerges from the complex electro-chemical reactions in the brain just doesn't make sense

Why not? The idea that complex patterns of energy can form matter and antimatter, why can't complex patterns of matter and anti-matter form consciousness?
It's simply order out of chaos.
example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ClC50BsK5Y

As things start to entropy, things also become more ordered. The highest order would be that of pure thought and consciousness. When the heat death of the universe occurs the universe will be in it's most highly ordered state. One could presume there's be a highly evolved consciousness there as well. A being that's been evolving for literally the entire length of the universe. In this time, at the end of the universe, time becomes meaningless. If you know all the positions and states of atoms in a system, you can predict it's past and future. In the heat death of the universe, there is only 1 positions for all the atoms of the universe. A being that exists there could predict and understand all the history of the universe, even what your thinking right now. And then restart the universe yet again. Perhaps changing the initial state this time, so things turn out slightly differently. Over and over, reiterating this process it could change the initial state of the universe in response to how intelligent being reacted to it's previous changes to the universe. In some way they act as extensions to this universal consciousness, being both separate and apart. In other ways we're just Von Neumann probes. Exploring, experiencing, and learning about the universe from our own unique perspective that eventually becomes added to and part of the universal consciousness at the end of the universe.

That's just 1 schizo theory anyway. I have other conflicting schizo ideas about the subject.

[Anonymous No.11574885]

>>11573105

Frankly, >>11571420 is the most pseud thing I've heard all year, even in spite of all the misinfo on this pandemic. I hope it wasn't you who said it lol

[Anonymous No.11576049]

>>11574605
>That's almost like saying that this post emerges from simple electrical interactions between specially designed chemical components

Not at all, your post is a bunch of nonsense. You can explain how logic gates and processors work, how operating systems work, how fonts are encoded, and ultimately how this post is an emergent property of a many complex systems. We cannot do the same for consciousness. There is no basis for why or how the functions of our brain create consciousness.

[Anonymous No.11576611]

>>11571150
>help me expand on bullshit
how about no

[Anonymous No.11576906]

I hope you know that literal demons are in this thread right now trying to convince you that physics is a real thing.

[Anonymous No.11576916]

>>11571150
>Universal consciousness
Define this.
>flows
Define this.
>capacitors
Define what you mean by capacitors, the kind you see in electrical engineering?
>compartmentalized nodes of consciousness
Define everything here.

>Help me expand this idea.
Not until you give a rigorous definition to your ideas. What you have here is philosophy mumbo-jumbo, neither math nor science.

[Anonymous No.11577175]

>>11576049
>There is no basis for why or how the functions of our brain create consciousness.
But also the point of the post is to make the comparison with other emergent systems, in this case ecological systems, which exhibit many of the traits of a living systems too, and in the sense that in the same way we can't point out how complexity emerges we do not deny the existence of more complex systems nor supose that there are metaphysical elements to it implied, just a lack of understanding of the intricacies and interactions from the limitations of our own biological design, so yes I'm claiming that consciousness stem from the brain but I thought that was a middle ground we all could agree on.

My point with the post was that in the case of computers we built the computers and we have almost all the information that composes the computer system to produce the post, you seem to have ignored that part too tho.

[Anonymous No.11577796]

>>11576916
>What you have here is philosophy mumbo-jumbo, neither math nor science.

[Anonymous No.11577835]

>>11577796
Haha yes, quoting them with green and posting a brainlet wojack sure showed them!

[Anonymous No.11578018]

>>11577835
>yes, quoting them with green and posting a brainlet wojack sure showed them!

[Anonymous No.11578050]

>>11571242
>mocking the 'define consciousness' shitposter
ABSOLUTELY FUCKING BASED

[Anonymous No.11578060]

>try to have interesting conversation on /sci/
>starts going somewhere
>gets derailed by wojak and soi boy posters
>chase them away
>interesting debate resumes
>wojak come back to derail thread again

[Anonymous No.11578064]

>try to have interesting conversation on /sci/
>starts going somewhere
>gets derailed by wojak and soi boy posters
>chase them away
>interesting debate resumes
>wojak come back to derail thread again
>this is why we can't have nice things.jpg

[Anonymous No.11578110]

>>11578064
Consciousness threads aren't nice things not are they interesting. They don't belong on a science board. They're circle jerk discussions for pseudo intellectual soiboys who forgot to take their meds and they use fluffed vocabulary to sound smart.

They really belong on /x/.

I wasnt the original soiposter itt. But your greentext gave me a great idea. I'll be sure to detail every single on of these garbage consciousness threads in the future with wojaks. Thanks you

[Anonymous No.11578115]

>>11578110
*derail

[Anonymous No.11578117]

You guys seem knowledgeable, I have a question.
What is the origin of our actions? If our actions do not satisfy us, how can we alter said origin to make them satisfying to us?

[Anonymous No.11578148]

>>11578117
The origin of your actions is from outside stimuli affecting your brain.

Holy shit is this board that fucking stupid?

[Anonymous No.11578164]

>>11571150
>Compartmentalized nodes of consciousness
I agree with this
>Universal consciousness
No proof that this exists.

[Anonymous No.11578172]

>>11573120
>Survival instincts kicking in, making you react with anger and fear at the fact that you might not be an individual, but merely a box of relays

[Anonymous No.11578187]

>>11578110
>>I am the embodiment of /sci/ and anything I don't like I'll destroy
This is what you sound like.

You should make another IQ thread. Cause IQ threads are what /sci/ is really about.

[Anonymous No.11578191]

>>11578187
>This is what you sound like!!!!!!!!
>You should make another IQ thread. Cause IQ threads are what /sci/ is really about!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.11578199]

>>11578191
dude, calm down and stop sperging out
breath, or listen to some music or something

[Anonymous No.11578207]

>>11578191
>His post was deleted
Ahahaha

[Anonymous No.11578212]

>>11578207
I deleted it myself because it was too upsetting for some people in this thread, apparently.

[Anonymous No.11578222]

>>11578212
The only one who's upset is you, you low iq subhuman. I'm guessing you're a nigger?

[Anonymous No.11578225]

>>11578148
Only outside stimuli? That doesn't seem right.

[Anonymous No.11578226]

"They" (the kikes) want you to think you have free will. Only niggers dont believe consciousness doesn't play an important role in free will. Niggers will never understand the complex thought and particle physics that's going on in the brain. It's all a simulation

[Anonymous No.11578232]

>>11578225
>Only outside stimuli? That doesn't seem right.

What else what it be? Do you have room temperature IQ or something?

[Anonymous No.11578238]

>>11578232
Story of pic?

[Anonymous No.11578247]

>>11571150
Oogabooga hokis polis.
Me spiritual Chief will idea is deemed by the gods to be truthful.
We must sacrifice a frog for this occasion.

[Anonymous No.11578264]

>>11578238
Clearly, the illuminati chopped his dick off as part of some kind of ancient sacred ceremony.

[Anonymous No.11578281]

>>11571150
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6fcK_fRYaI

[Anonymous No.11578470]

prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.11578615]

>>11578470
prove your right

[Anonymous No.11578877]

>>11578615
That's not how it works

[Anonymous No.11578939]

>>11578877
ok retard

[Anonymous No.11578966]

>>11578939
Congratulations!
You win Redditor™ Of The Day

[Anonymous No.11578973]

>>11578966
(you)

[Anonymous No.11578994]

>>11578966
he's right tho

Burden of proof is especially crucial for defending against unfalsifiable claims. Otherwise anyone could claim something crazy, such as hyper-dimensional space lizards are posting in this thread. If you ignore the burden of proof or if somehow burden of proof didn't exist or somehow never invented, then this insane claim about space lizards would in fact become true.

If that sounded insane to you, congratulations! You intuitively understand burden of proof.

[Anonymous No.11578999]

>>11571150
Related: if you zoom out to the largest cosmic scale, the universe looks exactly like a human brain, with a cerebellum and everything

[Anonymous No.11579032]

>>11578994
Congratulations!
You win Redditor™ of the Week

[Anonymous No.11579422]

>>11578999
Woah! Dude that's crazy!

[Anonymous No.11580113]

>>11571150
schizo

[Anonymous No.11580603]

>>11574146
Faggot

[Anonymous No.11580641]

>>11579422
This would be the "addicted to the implications" meme. The intellectual version of being addicted to the expectations generated by a given event.

What purpose does presenting it serve?

Anyone care to educate me?

>t.Virgin moment

[Anonymous No.11581712]

>>11577175
>in this case ecological systems, which exhibit many of the traits of a living systems too, and in the sense that in the same way we can't point out how complexity emerges
Yes we can you fucking brainlet. We have a very detailed model for genetics, how dna mutates, how different things compete for resources, etc. We can point to individual human psychology as a contributing piece of the complexity of civilization. There is currently no way to do this with consciousness.

>claiming that consciousness stem from the brain but I thought that was a middle ground we all could agree on
I think everyone will agree that our brains are a contributing factor in us being conscious. But it is a huge leap of faith to say consciousness is just a product of the brain.

>My point with the post was that in the case of computers we built the computers and we have almost all the information that composes the computer system to produce the post, you seem to have ignored that part too tho.
What does it matter if the complexity was accidental or manufactured? You can either explain how complexity emerges or you can't.

Maybe someday we'll make a discovery that explains consciousness in a purely physical way(probably not without expanding our idea of physics) but for now it's just one of many unanswerable questions But pseuds just can't handle questions without answers so they have to jump to bullshit conclusions like "It's emergent!" without any explanation.

[Anonymous No.11581756]

>>11581712
>But it is a huge leap of faith to say consciousness is just a product of the brain.

It only exist in the mind. ie the brain.

Fuck, this board is full of room temperature iq brainlets

[Anonymous No.11581773]

>>11581712
>Yes we can you fucking brainlet.
Oh nice, I did not know that, please present your precise models of ecological interactions as soon as possible so we can finally start managing ecological impact with precision instead of resorting to things like the precautionary principle because we have no idea what the fuck is going to happen.
>But it is a huge leap of faith to say consciousness is just a product of the brain.
Not unless you want to fill gaps with metaphysical knowledge because you lack a physical explanation yet.
> was accidental or manufactured?
If it was manufactured you have an intrinsic understanding in how it works since all the elements are known and they have intent, if it was accidental it's a black box unless you start reconstructing it from top to bottom
>like "It's emergent!" without any explanation.
I'm not giving an answer, I'm saying that the path to understanding consciousness goes through deepening our understanding of complex system and their mechanisms, emergence being a strong part of this since it's a process that produces the same effect in wildy different parts of nature, and it happens in evolution a lot, so why not look at consciosness as a result of increasing evolutive complexity? And therefore, what other mechanism do we know that increases complexity within a system?

[Anonymous No.11581811]

>>11581756
>It only exist in the mind. ie the brain
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.11581828]

>>11581773
>Oh nice, I did not know that, please present your precise models of ecological interactions as soon as possible so we can finally start managing ecological impact with precision instead of resorting to things like the precautionary principle because we have no idea what the fuck is going to happen.
Nice goalpost moving. From we can't point out how complexity emerges to we don't have total control of reality.

>Not unless you want to fill gaps with metaphysical knowledge because you lack a physical explanation yet
I'm not filling in any gaps. I accept that I don't know all the mysteries of consciousness and that maybe someday it will be explained physically and that even a potential physical explanation may not be encapsulated by the brain.

[Anonymous No.11581840]

>>11581828
>From we can't point out how complexity emerges to we don't have total control of reality.
Increasing our understanding of reality increases our control of it, that's not new.
>I'm not filling in any gaps
Then wtf are we discussing? Or did you just bump the thread?

[Anonymous No.11582094]

>>11578050
There are so many problems with this.
First, material does not need to "arise from" consciousness, or vice versa. If you define material as containing consciousness, then your definition of material just becomes substance, in which physical and mental reality are both contained. And vice versa, if you define consciousness as containing material, then your definition of consciousness becomes substance, in which is contained physical and mental reality. Spinoza is so far ahead of everyone that in the 16th century he came up with mind-body parallelism, where with any physical change there is a corresponding mental change, and vice versa.
Next, he claims we are not thinking of breathing while breathing, which we are, since we can always feel ourselves breathing, which is a perception, which is conscious, which is a thought, which is in the mind.
He then claims that we create our own realities within our own minds. But we do not CREATE these thoughts, we transform thought. Though does not come from nowhere. It has to be contained in everything, since there is nothing outside of everything that can come to be. The method of transforming could then be analyzed, to which we would then realize you don't have free will either, which is what this retard is trying to sneak into his theory via consciousness. The reason we experience a feeling of free will is because we cannot know ourselves. If we could know ourselves, then we would need to know ourselves knowing ourselves, which would mean we would need to know ourselves knowing ourselves knowing ourselves etc. etc. which is impossible, which is why you always run into paradoxes with self-referntiality hence Godel's theory and Russels set theory paradox.
Next, reality cannot originate from consciousness, since there would need to be some method of origination from consciousness over both, of which would become your new reality. This reminds me of Leibniz's metaphysical cheat with God harmonizing monad consciousness.

[Anonymous No.11582128]

>>11578050
Anyways, this destroys completely his theory that "the universe exists within us" instead of us "existing in the universe", since the universe is tautologically defined as everything, so every thing, including you, me, that device you are reading this on, is contained in everything / the universe.
Next, he asks what happens when we die, in which he attempts to tackle time. Of course, he will never undeify death since he already transcendentalized identity, not understanding that identity is just a thought parallel to a body evolved over time constantly changing like everything else because it is a limited part of everything and so has other parts to transform into, yet staying constant because of existential synchronization, which is why everything doesn't change, and how only parts perspectives and bodies change.

[Anonymous No.11582199]

>>11581840
>Then wtf are we discussing?
That people who fill in the gaps with magic or suggest that there are no gaps to fill are retarded.

[Anonymous No.11582356]

>>11582094
Room temp in Celsius I.Q retard.

[Anonymous No.11582362]

>>11578994
No, empirically you must disprove a claim, you never prove it.
The "burden of proof" SOLELY rests on the person who must disprove the claim.

[Anonymous No.11582384]

>>11576916
kinda feel Op. uhh. where to begin.


>>compartmentalized nodes of consciousness
imagine like... every time you go to visit your parents and you end up talking about food.

remember chris poole talking about identity. chris the 4chan guy is much different then chris the son etc.

everywhere you go you're a different person. on the streets...I run into the guy that was messing with my family and killer instincts kick into overdrive. people are nothing without a purpose. some are just so much better. while most do everything to avoid confrontation.

[Anonymous No.11582392]

>>11582128
feel as if others are subsets of me. most are worker bees. it's a very small universe cause their only purpose is to serve the worker bee

[Anonymous No.11582394]

>>11582094
>>11582128
schizo

[Anonymous No.11582398]

>>11582394
inferiority complex

[Anonymous No.11582658]

>>11582398
insult!!

am I participating in this thread correctly?
I love these deep high IQ discussion. I hope I did it right.

[Anonymous No.11582667]

>>11571150
yo what did conciousness go through b4 the invention of caps tho?

[Anonymous No.11583571]

>>11573060
Different anon here. I agree with what you're saying, but as cringe as it sounds, if there were a formula to encompass all that there is it would be akin to God. Just a weird take on how materialism could possibly circle back in on spiritualism.

[Anonymous No.11583585]

>>11578018
I don't care who you are, this jackass is funny.

[Anonymous No.11583609]

>>11578050
I hope for this. I don't want to be a god, I just want to be, and be beautiful.