[ 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: 19 KB, 428x368, 1656561046228.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14962315 No.14962315 [Reply] [Original]

>book about consciousness claiming it has solved the hard problem.
>only talks about the content/states of consciousness rather than explaining the hard problem and then at the end concludes that the hard problem is just an illusion, not a real problem that needs to be explained.

>> No.14962395

I think I know the answer to this. Just a ground-up mistake that qualia requires two components, the object and the subject.
If you think about it, there's no reason to believe that to be the case at all.
I think what it is, is that just as atoms and galaxies can exist independent of living beings, qualia exists in the same way.
The "living being" I think might be a sort of parasitic entity made of a coil of sensations and ideas, where if unravelled, there would be nothing there seeing the world but just the seen world.

Sights are never seen by anybody or anything, knowledge is never known by anybody or anything, etc. The qualitative element exists independently by itself in actuality. Sort of like how light is not lit up, because light IS light. Exactly the same, sights might not be seen, because sights ARE sights.

>> No.14964052

The funniest thing about Dennett's book is the huge ass collection of thought experiments he presents which underline the hardness of the hard problem, yet he just claims they'd disprove qualia. His argument then literally is "qualia is too hard of a problem for me, therefore it can't be real".

>> No.14964058

frog threads are all spam

>> No.14964973

>>14962315
That's the classic documentary format
>Title: Aliens built the pyramids
>Did aliens build this pyramid?
>Or was it just humans using a method we don't know about?
>You decide

>> No.14964981

That's what you get for reading books on soft science/"philosophy" you midwit.

Every religion has already answered this question with idealism, just also applying their own theories on higher powers.

>> No.14966362

it's just a meme
you can't solve memes
>I solved your meme
>No you didn't!
>Yes I did
>No you didn't!
>...

>> No.14966627

>>14962315
Its stupid because the whole idea stems from false notions

>posit external substance based monism as default
>claim consciousness as substrate on top
>ask to explain how substance monism deals with the problem

The answer you're forced into is either wholistic monism, dualism or deny consciousness exists. All three are stupid answers due to the nature of the question pidgeon holding people into the type of problem and presenting it as a problem that "needs to be solved" nonsense.

Step back from the premise of the question, re-examine substance monism and we'll come up with a different sets of problem

>> No.14966634
File: 213 KB, 1126x832, 1659569695857489.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14966634

>>14962395
So many words saying nothing. Just pure schizobabbling.

>> No.14966642

>>14962315
Every day of my life

>> No.14966653

The aim of my life is to extend it. But at present, I find no desire to go on living. What makes me think that if I should be successful at extending life, that I will not be just as bored with living it as I am now? The simple answer is that I have no answer.

>> No.14966661
File: 1.40 MB, 1438x2278, odomtech overview.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14966661

>>14962315
consciousness has already been solved by the military industrial complex

>> No.14966684

It is so unlikely that we (consciousness) are here. And yet we are. I can only conclude that we will be here again.