/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4809434]

What will it take for Psychology to become a real Science?

[Anonymous No.4809438]

A miracle.

[Anonymous No.4809455]

More rigorous testing methods, and a subject of study not as ridiculous as consciousness.

Seriously, I have a lot of respect for psych folks, I know they work hard, but jesus, you can't study the mind in motion without looking a little silly at the end of the day.

[Anonymous No.4809458]

>>4809455

So are you saying consciousness doesn't exist, or what?

[Anonymous No.4809462]

>>4809458
Prove that it does.

[Anonymous No.4809466]

I'm gonna be slightly retarded now and forget to watch my step; why is psychology not a science?

[Anonymous No.4809470]

>>4809462

You and I are having a conversation, albeit over the internet. You are expressing thoughts, as am I. Without a consciousness there are no thoughts, and there is no conversation.

[valjean !!4SOyPF0IuOv No.4809469]

>>4809466
Because /sci/ thinks it's stupid (myself not included).
In reality, pyschology uses statistics and empirical testing methods to model neurochemical/behavioral phenomena and thus is quite scientific.

[Anonymous No.4809472]

>>4809458
Oh, it totally exists, but psychologists are trying to study it as it's moving, as it's making all those crazy, self-contradictory twists that make it such a powerful, versatile tool in life.

The problem is that consciousness (as we understand it, at least) doesn't standardize well. You can't really make effective blanket statements about the mind the way you can about a valence shell or a chemical bond.

[Anonymous No.4809475]

>>4809434
I think that psychology is just a placeholder for when we actually understand how the human brain and human consciousness works. Once we understand those thoroughly then anything wrong with your brain can be addressed directly.

Of course it'll probably be hundreds of years before that actually happens, assuming we don't extinguish ourselves as a race before then.

[Anonymous No.4809476]

>>4809472

>psychologists are trying to study it as it's moving, as it's making all those crazy, self-contradictory twists

Could you please be a bit more specific?

[Anonymous No.4809479]

>>4809475

>Once we understand those thoroughly then anything wrong with your brain can be addressed directly.

So if someone is depressed due to being in a relationship with an abusive partner, are you going to give them medication so they think that everything is alright?

[Anonymous No.4809484]

>>4809434
>What will it take for Psychology to become a real Science?

Hell being invented and then freezing over.

[Language reform guy !KHn8YK/x0g No.4809486]

> What will it take for Psychology to become a real Science?

Nothing. Psychology is already science.

Inb4 not true scotsman.

[Anonymous No.4809485]

>>4809455
Mind is always in motion. Most psychologists dont take this into account when making their claims.

>Two monks were watching a flag flapping in the wind. One said to the other, "The flag is moving."
>The other replied, "The wind is moving."
>Huineng overheard this. He said, "Not the flag, not the wind; mind is moving."

[Anonymous No.4809501]

>>4809476
I'm not sure what's unclear in that statement, but here goes.

Even though we might be able to understand how individual component of the brain work from moment to moment, the more complex functions, emotion, decision-making, memory, are still a ways beyond our comprehension. They aren't impenetrable mysteries like they maybe were once upon a time, but we still don't have a good model for how the brain produces consciousness from disparate gooey chunks.

A lot of psychologists try to observe and understand the mind, but their methods involve a lot of looking at the whole thing at once and trying to produce meaningful observations about its entirety. It's important work, and I do think they've made some extremely beneficial contributions to human knowledge, I just don't envy them the job.

[Anonymous No.4809509]

>>4809486
Oh no dont start with that shit. No true Scotsman is not a critical thinking fallacy. its intellectualist bullshit.

A science is one that uses scientific method to come to its judgments.

It believes in cause and effect.

However, psychologist believes in mental cause and effect. Which why it looks to explain physical things with mentality, instead of properly. And why it is a soft science.

[Anonymous No.4809516]

>>4809479
No.. you'd fix whatever is wrong with the person doing the abusing, then fix whatever damage was caused by that person's damage. ;-)

[Anonymous No.4809519]

>>4809434
It will take tulpas going mainstream for this to happen.

[Language reform guy !KHn8YK/x0g No.4809544]

>>4809509
>Oh no dont start with that shit. No true Scotsman is not a critical thinking fallacy. its intellectualist bullshit.

...

Nothing else u said is inconsistent with what i said. I don't particularly disagree that it is a soft science. Neither do i disagree that there are problems in the field. None of this implies it isn't a scientific field.

[Anonymous No.4809548]

Connecting every theory to to brain/body would be a start.

[Anonymous No.4809749]

>>4809509

>instead of properly

[Anonymous No.4809764]

Synaptic weight. :3

[Anonymous No.4809768]

>>4809470
Robots can communicate. Your argument is invalid.

[Anonymous No.4809774]

>>4809485
Ah, the glories of holistic epistemological casuistry. How fatuitous.

[Anonymous No.4809780]

>>4809548
>Connecting every theory to to brain/body would be a start.

Well you can forget about that.

You're basically asking an entire field to 'wait up' for scientific procedures which will never happen...

And they are understandably not going to do that.

So the "scientific" community will always and forever have something to bitch about when it comes to these other practices.

[Anonymous No.4809782]

>>4809462

>sci
>demanding we prove the existence of consciousness

Holy shit they weren't joking about this place.

>2012
>Playing the devils advocate and skeptic about every little fucking thing
>Believing this makes you a scientific mind

K.

[Anonymous No.4809792]

>>4809782
>2012
>believing in a magic "consciousness" that cannot be observed or measured
>calling said belief "scientific"

Just kill yourself, religiontard.

[Anonymous No.4809789]

>>4809780
Well, it's evident to anyone that the fields of psychology and psychiatry respectively are essentially extispicious.

[Anonymous No.4809801]

>>4809792
Actually, the nature of consciousness can be apodictically assessed. Ever heard of the Libet Experiment? Perhaps the research done on the communication of action potentials innervating the thalamo-cortic-thalamic circuits and so on?

[Anonymous No.4809816]

>>4809792

What the fuck is wrong with you?

Are you seriously implying consciousness is a religious invention?

You HAVE to be trolling.

You're probably not stupid.

And if you aren't trolling it's obvious you've developed an allergy to anything you don't understand - and simply declare topics beyond yourself to be "religious".

In other words you are a cave man balking at shit as being 'magic' because you don't understand it.

You're actually employing dogma and don't even realize it.

I pity you and everyone like you, you are the equivalent of a religious fanatic.

"I don't understand it - therefore it is the Devil".

"I don't undersatnd it - therefore it is Religion".

[Anonymous No.4809814]

What will it take for history to become a real science?

[Anonymous No.4809815]

Neurology folks.

[Anonymous No.4809826]

>>4809792

Double slit experiment.

The fuck, dude. You can't just call people 'religiontard' while being a blatant retard yourself.

[Anonymous No.4809827]

>>4809814
When the yids stop tampering with it.

[Anonymous No.4809822]

>>4809472
So is Chemistry a placeholder until we figure out how physics works?

[Anonymous No.4809831]

>>4809814
I see what you did there, sir.

[Anonymous No.4809837]

Consciousness has become a buzzword of sorts in the 'paranormal' or spiritual arenas, so you're not really allowed to mention it around base minded peasants who believe themselves to be "scientific".

Their only instinct is to react as if you just mentioned the name of Jesus, and they usually aren't aware of the studies in consciousness and actual scientific proof that it affects things on a quantum level.

But then you can't expect someone who postures themselves to be rational and actually lacks any real knowledge - to know about these things.

It's easier for them to just label everyone a 'religiontard' and strut around with their chins in the air than to realize how incredibly stupid they are.

[Anonymous No.4809838]

I believe I'm the only "conscious" being in existence and the whole universe right down to this thread is just something that's happening in my head. For example, a few minutes ago maybe my mind wanted to think about itself, so this thread came up to remind me to do so. None of this, or even any of "you' even existed before I sub consciously decided to think about this topic.

[Anonymous No.4809843]

>>4809434
It's already science.

[Anonymous No.4809841]

>>4809792

I like how you can just say someone "believes" in something and suddenly it's not real.

[Anonymous No.4809848]

>>4809841
Well, usually belief is implicit to an insubstantial adherence to something.

[Anonymous No.4809868]

>>4809801
Give me a scientific definition of consciousness. I know you can't.

>>4809816
Consciousness is not a scientific term and we can't even show that it exists. Something that cannot be observed or measured is nonsense and goes to /x/.

>>4809826
People who believe in magic are stupid and I will continue calling them retards.

>>4809841
Well it is not real. Show me any evidence. There is none.

[Anonymous No.4809895]

>>4809891
>qualitites of awareness

No such thing exists. Stop mixing pseudoscience shit into your /sci/ posts.

[Anonymous No.4809891]

>>4809868
The communication of action potentials betwixt necessary neurological structures as to facilitate the canonical qualities of awareness.

[Anonymous No.4809902]

>>4809868
>>4809891
Also, way to ignore my adducements, asshole.

[Anonymous No.4809906]

First of all: Psychology is a science. Science is defined by methods, not by the field of interest. Or would you say astrologists are scientists because they "read the stars"?

Furthermore, how can you make any claims about things you obviously haven't done any research (not even wikipedia, seriously?) about?
Consciousness is not some kind of esoteric mambo-jambo. It is part of neuroscience. It is the ability to form meta-meta-representations. The awareness about yourself and stimuli in your environment.

I guess the troll must be fed by now. However, my post is also adressed to all the other self-entitled neckbeards of so-called "hard sciences".

[Anonymous No.4809911]

>>4809895
Actually, they do exist. Usually it's expressed by responsiveness to a criteria of stimuli. Keep up with the ad hominems, buddy.

[Anonymous No.4809912]

>>4809902
What "adducements"? You mean the actual pseudoscience research or the pseudoscientific misintepretations of scientific results? Anyway your shit belongs to /x/.

[Anonymous No.4809919]

>>4809911
Show me the evidence. There is no evidence for your shit. It is not properly defined, has no observable effects and we can explain everything by science and without needing to resort to magic. You are an /x/tard and don't belong here.

[Anonymous No.4809925]

>>4809912
".Ever heard of the Libet Experiment? Perhaps the research done on the communication of action potentials innervating the thalamo-cortic-thalamic circuits and so on?"

I'm done entertaining your pestilential eristic inquiries and irreverent imputations. You're so obviously trolling.

[Anonymous No.4809931]

>>4809919
I did.

[Anonymous No.4809933]

>>4809919

Even more convinced that you are a troll by now, but anyway, here I go:

Following your logic, "intelligence" doesn't exist either, because it can't be observed and we do not have a real definition for it.

[Anonymous No.4809935]

>>4809868
>Give me a scientific definition of consciousness. I know you can't.
I'll try: awareness of a stimulus or a personal mental state. I don't think there's a very good definition as of yet, but the philosophical musings of what exactly consciousness is are exactly what slowed down research into the phenomenon. Research into consciousness at present often focuses on subliminal vs supraliminal priming and intentional and voluntary actions. These areas might give us a more complete picture on what constitutes consciousness.
>Consciousness is not a scientific term and we can't even show that it exists. Something that cannot be observed or measured is nonsense and goes to /x/.
Behavior can observably vary depending on whether you are consciously aware or unaware of something. For example, subliminal (unconscious) motivators have different effects than consciously processed motivators. While we can not precisely show neural correlates of conscious thought, its effects on behavior are definitely observable.

[Anonymous No.4809934]

>>4809925
You are the obvious troll if you believe the Libet experiment proves your magical "consciousness". All it does is showing us that free will doesn't exist and that every action can be explain by chemicals in your brain. Idiotic fairy tales like "awareness" have no evidence and thus no scientific relevance.

[Anonymous No.4809938]

>>4809931
You did nothing. Show me your fucking evidence. Prove your magical "consciousness" to exist.

>>4809933
Intelligence can be measured by IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.4809947]

>>4809934
"that every action can be explain by chemicals in your brain."
Haha, you just shot yourself in the foot, buddy.

Better luck next time.

[Anonymous No.4809953]

>>4809938

And consciousness can be measured by the Glasgow-Coma-Scale. Checkmate.

That was way too easy, haha.

[Anonymous No.4809954]

>>4809947
You just got told fucking hard and don't even realize it, retard.

[Anonymous No.4809949]

>>4809935
>awareness

Yeah sure, define one magical philosophy term by another unfalsifiable bullshit word.

Fact: What we observe is behaviour and chemical reactions in the brain and that's enough to explain everything. No need for supernatural shit like "consciousness" or "awareness" that supposedly doesn't even have any effects. Occam's razor kills your /x/ shit.

[Anonymous No.4809956]

Neuroscience is the key. Right now psychology exists in an in between zone between hard science and social science. It has scientific methods but many of its explanations lack a biochemical basis which is the only truly accurate way to view the brain.

If we were to discuss the functioning of the pulmonary system, we would do it in biochemical and cellular terms. Thus, anatomy is a science. The brain is more of a mystery so often psychologists fall back on social rather than scientific explanations.

Neuroscience is the future. The cellular basis for learning has been established. Certain neurons in the brain grown more and more axons when used more often than others and so those tissues in the brain can transmit larger amounts of neurotransmitters faster.

In addition the biochemical bases for numerous diseases, ranging from cut and dry symptoms like Parkinsons to vaguer ones like depression have been identified. Furthermore, many emotions have been associated with specific neurotransmitters.

Its only a matter of time before every conscious thought correlates directly to a specific biochemical pathway

[Anonymous No.4809961]

>>4809938
You haven't incontrovertibly evinced how it doesn't qualify as suitable substrata for my argument.
You're caviling.

[Anonymous No.4809966]

>>4809934
Whether free will exists or not is dependent upon its definition, I like to think of it as self-determined behavior, i.e. behavior that can be explained by the beliefs and desires of the person itself and is performed in a voluntary, intentional manner instead of a purely stimulus-driven manner

[Anonymous No.4809971]

>>4809947
You might be too uninformed to realize this, but yes, every of the brain's activities has a chemical basis. What the fuck else would it be? Magic? A soul?

Really unless you're a religious person you can't deny the physical basis for everything that happens in the mind.

tl;dr mind and brain are one

[Anonymous No.4809972]

>>4809954
How so, samefag?

[Anonymous No.4809977]

>>4809956
>conscious thought

Oh shit, we got another retard in here. "Conscious thought" doesn't exist. It has no evidence and no relevance. We can explain everything without resorting to unfalsifiable pseudoreligious magic.

>>4809961
You haven't provided any evidence and I know you can't. I might as well ask you to provide evidence for leprechauns becaue they are just as non-existent.

>>4809966
It is purely stimulus driven. What else should it be? Dualism? Don't be that retarded.

[Anonymous No.4809978]

>>4809971
You're too uninformed to recognize my position on the matter. Reread the discussion, if you will.

[Anonymous No.4809983]

>>4809978
You are a fucking retard. Dualism goes to >>>/x/

[Anonymous No.4809992]

>>4809956
>Neuroscience is the key.
Half the people at the experimental psychology research lab of my university perform neuroscientific research. If you read neuroscientific papers, look at the departments and people involved, in a lot of cases they are psychology departments and psychologists (experimental/cognitive). /sci/ seems to be very ill-informed as to what psychology researchers actually do.

[Anonymous No.4809991]

>>4809977
You're just nitpicking. Fine, consciousness doesn't exist. There is still definitely a phenomenon for which the phrase "conscious thought" refers to.

Yes "hot" and "cold" are subjective terms and i guess you would argue that they don't exist but they still refer to specific phenomena.

Pull your fucking head out of your ass and realize that my entire argument supported a deterministic, non religious viewpoint

[Anonymous No.4809996]

>>4809977
How can I explicate the construct of consciousness any further to you? I suppose another adducement could be based upon the hebbian model wherein neurons have a reaction to stimuli and that respective stimuli facilitates synaptic stability(associative learning).

[Anonymous No.4809997]

>>4809991
>There is still definitely a phenomenon for which the phrase "conscious thought" refers to.

Show me that "phenomenon". Where's your evidence? And why would we need to violate Occam's razor, when everything can be explained perfectly without your "conscious thought" magic?

>a deterministic, non religious viewpoint

Haha, you are seriously retarded. All the time you are arguing in favor of irrelevant unfalsifiable magic and now you tell me you are not religious?

[Anonymous No.4810002]

>>4809996
The hebbian model works perfectly without needing magic. You shot yourself in the foot faggot, because you provided evidence for how we don't need the "consciousness" pseudoscience shit because we can explain everything without it.

[Anonymous No.4810003]

>>4809997
Troll 6/10 for making me take so long to spot it

[Anonymous No.4809999]

>>4809992
You might be mistaking me for someone who thinks psychology is bullshit. To get back to my post, is there anything in there which is outright wrong?

[Anonymous No.4810001]

>>4809983
I'm not a dualist. Stop conflating my arguments with other people's.

[Anonymous No.4810011]

>>4810001
What are you then? You believe in something that has no evidence and is killed by Occam's razor. That's retarded.

>>4810003
>has no evidence for his magic beliefs
>yells troll

Yeah I knew you couldn't argue against logic and science.

[Anonymous No.4810015]

>>4810012
Quantum mysticism is even more retarded.

[Anonymous No.4810012]

>>4809868
>Consciousness is not a scientific term and we can't even show that it exists.

Double.

Slit.

Experiment.

Quantum.

Physics.

I know you can hear me. You are simply wrong and doing what people who are wrong do, though. So, carry on, wrong person who is wrong.

[Anonymous No.4810026]

I am taking an MSc in Cognitive Neuroscience. Is this a real science?

[Anonymous No.4810025]

>>4810011
A troll should in some way address the opponents reply. Yours fails to do that.

Or youre just so stupid that you read through my first post without seeing any of the hard science in there, saw "conscious thought", and readied your recycled response.

[Anonymous No.4810030]

>>4810025
You were using pseudoscience vocabulary and obviously you believe in that shit as well. That makes your post worthless. I don't care if you occasionally mix facts in your retard babble, it remains retard babble, just like quantum mysticism.

[Anonymous No.4810031]

>>4810002
You probably don't even know what Hebbian theory is apart from a breviloquent Wikipedia search. You can deduce rather sufficiently that the hebbian model could not function without awareness.

[Anonymous No.4810027]

>>4809919
>You are an /x/tard and don't belong here.

You're insisting consciousness does not exist and deliberately ignoring it's place in quantum physics.

You don't belong anywhere. Not /x/ and certainly not here.

You're a fucking moron, buddy. You can carry on telling people they are religious, or conspiracy theorists, or paranormal enthusiasts. It really doesn't change the fact that you're a pleb.

[CNS !MT.CNS.YRY No.4810032]

>>4810026
Yup.

[Anonymous No.4810035]

>>4809949
>Yeah sure, define one magical philosophy term by another unfalsifiable bullshit word.
You must be a troll, there's a simple test to see whether you were aware of something or not: "can you tell me what you just saw".
>Fact: What we observe is behaviour and chemical reactions in the brain and that's enough to explain everything. No need for supernatural shit like "consciousness" or "awareness" that supposedly doesn't even have any effects. Occam's razor kills your /x/ shit.
But it has observable effects you ignorant shitbrain. "Consciousness" or "awareness" is just as supernatural as "sight" or "inhibition". They are functions that researchers try to understand by looking at their effects on neural activation and behavior.

[Anonymous No.4810037]

Doesn't fucking matter as long as it works.
In contrast to the hard sciences, psychiatri and psychology should only be judged on their ability to improve the life quality of its patients.
Neuroscience is another chapter.

[Anonymous No.4810038]

>>4810032
What is your major?

[Anonymous No.4810039]

>>4810027
Quantum physics is science and doesn't need magic. Keep your pseudoscience shit out.

>>4810031
There is no such thing as "awareness". The hebbian model even works for artificial neural networks and you know why? That's right, because there is no difference. Our brains are nothing but biological machines and for sure they contain no magic.

[Anonymous No.4810046]

>>4809977
>"Conscious thought" doesn't exist.

Who ARE you?

Where do people like you come from?

Did you just sit around listening to your older brother and his college buddies spew self-entitled bullshit and it's rubbed off on you?

There is a personality flaw here, it's not just ignorance.

Do you deny the existence of sub-conscious thought as well?

Are you not aware of how many scientific fields dabble exclusively in that field?

... Don't even answer, this is all rhetorical. Just pointing out that your idiocy is certainly coming from somewhere else than just benign mis-directed rationale. I suspect someone has scared you away from the term 'consciousness' because they had tiny minds and you admired them for their scientific authority - and you are now incapable of discussing it with non-retarded individuals.

[CNS !MT.CNS.YRY No.4810049]

>>4810038
I'm a third year PhD student in cognitive neuroscience. So yeah, I guess I'm biased.

[Anonymous No.4810050]

>>4810035
>"can you tell me what you just saw"
A computer with scanncer and image recognition can answer this question. Your awareness shit is making me mad. Awareness doesn't exist. It's all just input --> neural activity ---> output. There is not place for magic in science.

>But it has observable effects
Name one. And I mean one that cannot be explained by science without needing the term "consciousness".

[Anonymous No.4810056]

I believe that our term "concsiousness" and "awareness" are not completely wrong, but they are primitive understandings of something very complex.
Rather investigate than to just dismiss it.

[Anonymous No.4810057]

>>4810030
>>4810015

>Calls a conclusive quantum physics experiment that roved the affect of observation upon the behavior of electrons "mysticism".

Ah fuck it. It really doesn't matter if you're deliberately trolling or not, you're not worth another keystroke.

[Anonymous No.4810058]

>>4810049
I see. I hope to start a PhD in Neuroscience after my masters. I am a britfag. I believe I have messaged you once or twice on here a few months ago.

[Anonymous No.4810060]

>>4810046
>Who ARE you?
A human. In other words a biological machine that doesn't have any magic in it and can be fully explained by science.

>Where do people like you come from?
Do I really have to explain reproduction to you?

>Did you just sit around listening to your older brother and his college buddies spew self-entitled bullshit and it's rubbed off on you?
Other than you I educate myself instead of believing in fairy tales.

>There is a personality flaw here, it's not just ignorance.
If you think knowing science and logic is a personality flaw.

>Do you deny the existence of sub-conscious thought as well?
No such thing as a "thought" exists in science. That's a pseudoscientific term and you are retarded for using it.

>Are you not aware of how many scientific fields dabble exclusively in that field?
It's called pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.4810061]

>>4810039
That's because those artificial models simulate basic receptors and are not nearly complex as a functioning human brain, hence those respective models' lack of sentience and other mental processes. Now, here would arise they obligatory notion of artificial intelligence, which would be subsequently met with the elucidation of the qualities of the human brain anent to any forementioned artificial model to which one would conclude that they are dissimilar in complexity.

[Anonymous No.4810069]

>>4810039
>Quantum physics is science and doesn't need magic

And...

it...

proved the affect of consciousness on matter...

>Keep your pseudoscience shit out.

So is Quantum Physics "science" or "pseudo-science" now?

You are cancer.

[Anonymous No.4810071]

>>4809999
Nope your post is one of the few here that isn't drenched in ignorance. I just felt like saying that psychologists didn't miss the bandwagon that is neuroscience and in fact, that they were important in helping to develop it.

[CNS !MT.CNS.YRY No.4810067]

>>4810058
>I believe I have messaged you once or twice on here a few months ago.
About what if I may ask? I can't seem to remember.

[Anonymous No.4810080]

>>4810056
We don't even have definitions for this /x/ stuff and we don't need it. Science works without it and properly explains everything.

>>4810057
>has his pseudoscience shit debunked
>uses ad hominem

>>4810061
>sentience
Can you please stop using this retarded /x/ language? This shit has no evidence.

[Anonymous No.4810078]

>>4810039
>There is no such thing as "awareness"

Troll. Calling it for the thread, moving on.

Just another contrarion faggot looking to argue about anything possible.

"There is no spoon".

K.

[Anonymous No.4810084]

>>4810039
>Our brains are nothing but biological machines and for sure they contain no magic.

This is surely a great mind we're battling with, gentlemen.

[Anonymous No.4810086]

>>4810067
I told you I was starting an MSc in Cognitive Neuroscience and asked if you could add me on Skype as I had some questions and thought you may be a useful contact. I also may have asked you what you did before your PhD.

I will ask again now... before your PhD did you have any relevant work experience? Did you have a masters degree? Hopefully in 4 years I will be doing something very similar to you now.

[Anonymous No.4810088]

>>4810069
>proved the affect of consciousness on matter...
Bullshit. Taking a measurement does not require belief in magic.

>So is Quantum Physics "science" or "pseudo-science" now?
Just fuck off, retard. We all know that your mysticism is not quantum physics.

>>4810078
Do you have any evidence for "awareness"? You don't even have a definition. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.4810090]

>>4810080

If you are too stupid to intuitively realize that there lies something unexplained in these terms, you are too narrow-minded to a scientist.

[Anonymous No.4810092]

>>4810084
Tell me faggot, what else is there in the brain other than biochemistry? Mayb a "soul"? You must be retarded to believe this.

[Anonymous No.4810100]

>>4810060

You are cancer.

[Anonymous No.4810096]

>>4810084

Who the hell said that concsiousness is magic?

[Anonymous No.4810097]

>>4810090
There lies as much unexplained in them as there lies in the notinos of "ghosts" or other paranormal nonsense.

[Anonymous No.4810098]

>>4810080
The requisite versatility of perception.

[Anonymous No.4810101]

>>4810098
What versatility of perception? Perception is physically explained. Shit hits receptors and makes electrical signals. Big fucking deal.

[Anonymous No.4810104]

>>4810097
>>4810097

Seing that you are wrong, what is your explanation for this?

You do know that people mean different things with the word "consciousness" as they do with "God", right?

[Anonymous No.4810106]

>>4810096
It has no proper definition and no measurable or observable effects. It is not needed for any explanation. In other words it is useless magical belief and has no place in science.

>>4810100
At least I'm not retarded enough to believe in a "soul".

[Anonymous No.4810112]

>>4810104
No fucking difference. Both are fairy tales for retards and debunked by science.

[CNS !MT.CNS.YRY No.4810114]

>>4810086
>I told you I was starting an MSc in Cognitive Neuroscience and asked if you could add me on Skype as I had some questions and thought you may be a useful contact.
Ah, I see. Unfortunately I don't have a skype account.
>before your PhD did you have any relevant work experience?
I did 6 months of unpayed internship during my bachelors, and another year and a half during my masters. I also worked as a research assistant for two years during that time. That latter position is how I got my PhD spot.
>Did you have a masters degree?
Yup.
>Hopefully in 4 years I will be doing something very similar to you now
That's great! The UK has some fine neuroscience institutions. Especially some labs at UCL do state of the art and innovative research.

[Anonymous No.4810109]

>>4810097
You're going on an eristic empirical falsification tirade, grasping at straws all the while.

[Anonymous No.4810111]

>>4810101

>2012
>Believes that science know everything there is to know about the human brain

ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.4810120]

>>4810112
>>4810106

I don't believe in a soul, either.
If Einstein were alive, he would punch you so hard your jaw would fall off.

[Anonymous No.4810121]

>>4810080

You didn't debunk anything, dude.

All you've done is shout at everyone that there is no such thing as "awareness" or "consciousness".

Ignoring for the dozenth time the fact that consciousness having an affect on matter has BEEN SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

You are cancer.

You are wrong.

You have not debunked anything.

You are ignoring actual scientific evidence, and that is proof that you are either a troll, or a pleb frightened by the realities that science presents, so you simply cherry-pick your way through life calling anything you don't understand "magic".

You lose.

I win.

[Anonymous No.4810123]

>>4810101
Yes, but there are different responses depending on the receptor hence the modifier versatile.

[Anonymous No.4810124]

>>4810109
If there's no evidence it doesn't exist. Occam's razor, you idiot.

>>4810111
Tell me one thing science can't explain. I dare you.
Inb4 you name non-existent magic shit.

[Anonymous No.4810133]

>>4810124

Why is there something rather than nothing?

[Anonymous No.4810134]

>>4810124

I never said that there was something that was impossible for science to explain, I just said that there are many things it HAS NOT EXPLAINED YET.

Jesus, you don't even know anything about scientific method, do you?

[Anonymous No.4810136]

>>4810088
>Just fuck off, retard.

LOL.

First he calls quantum physics "magic".

Then he says it's "real science" and shouldn't be mixed up with my "magic".

When confronted with this obvious contradiction, his response is "fuck off faggot".

His mother should have aborted him.

[Anonymous No.4810139]

>>4810114
I am just worried I won't get onto a course. I will have a masters (which is NOT required, but would obviously be beneficial) and two weeks work experience in the Neurology department of a hospital (this summer). I tried to get more than two weeks but that's the most I could get unfortunately, and I tried several hospitals. I won't get into UCL, I am aiming lower. I have to be realistic.

[Anonymous No.4810140]

>>4810120
No need to be mad. You were posting retarded and I told you why you were wrong. Now educate yourself and fuck off.

>>4810121
Go on with your trolling and shitposting. It doesn't make you less wrong. You have no evidence and you know it. Quantum mysticism and gross misunderstandings of quantum science doesn't count.

>>4810123
Damn right. That's another piece of evidence for how everything can be explained physically without magic.

>>4810134
I know more about the scientific method than you, faggot. For example I know that magic is not part of the scientific method.

[Anonymous No.4810145]

>>4810124
No, that's argumentum ex silentio, which is an informal fallacy. Way to affirm your fatuity to everyone.

[Anonymous No.4810148]

>>4810124
>>4810124
>>4810124

Just because conciousness is nothing but electric signals, why can't we call it conciousness. Are you fucking dense? You have no intuitive understanding of questioning things, just an unjustified know-it-all attitude that relies an misinterpreteted views of scientific method.

[Anonymous No.4810153]

>>4810140
>>4810140

For one minute, I actually thought that you were an intelligent human being with an extremist point of view.
Now I realize that you are just too unintelligent to understand how science works but too autistic to realize it.

[Anonymous No.4810157]

>>4810096
>Who the hell said that concsiousness is magic?

This person

>>4809977
>>4810011
>>4810015
>>4810030
>>4810039
>>4810050
>>4810060
>>4810080
>>4810092
>>4810088
>>4810106
>>4810112
>>4810124

It's all the samefag. He's on summer vacation so he'll be able to keep this up all day.

Let's all point and laugh at the stupid samefag who doesn't believe the very function that allows him to type out his retarded posts - exists.

HAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

[Anonymous No.4810155]

>>4810136
Are you stupid? Show me where I called quantum physics magic. It never happened. Your idiotic mysticism interpretation is bullshit. That doesn't invalidate quatnum physics it only makes you a retard.

>>4810145
Go believe in faity tales on /x/. Here we are on a science board and science is based on facts and evidence.

>>4810148
>ust because conciousness is nothing but electric signals, why can't we call it conciousness
Because we don't need to introduce the vocabulary of magic into science. We have electrical signals. That's a good term and there's no need to rename it.

[Anonymous No.4810161]

>>4810155

It is not sufficient. The term covers the way these signals interact in the specific way in the human brain, not just the signals themselves.

[Anonymous No.4810163]

>>4810140
Now you're agreeing with me? You're clearly very confused.

[CNS !MT.CNS.YRY No.4810164]

>>4810139
Don't stress it. These types of admissions are about motivation rather than grades. You won't have to shoot for UCL, but I can highly recommend doing at least one internship during your masters. The fact that you already have some experience is good, given that it's not standard practice to do this as an undergraduate at all.

[Anonymous No.4810171]

>>4810101
>What versatility of perception?
>Perception is physically explained.
>Shit hits receptors and makes electrical signals. >Big fucking deal.

You really need to put a stop to this shit, /sci/

I know you can't, but Goddamn.

[Anonymous No.4810166]

>>4810153
Hey cancer fag, shut the fuck up. I asked you for evidence more than once and your only rebuttal is ad hominems. You don't belong on a science board.

>>4810157
The function that allows me two write here is my brain and only my brain. A "soul" doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.4810182]

>>4810166
Now you're just 'straw-manning' the guy.

[Anonymous No.4810183]

>>4810124

Derp I just graduated the 8th grade.

Derp OCCAMS RAZOR OCCAMS RAZOR I WIN

It's so easy to spot these ones.

[Anonymous No.4810181]

>>4810161
There's nothing special about how they interact. The interactions of electrical signals are explained physically. We don't need to assing pseudoscientific words to them.

>>4810171
Put a stop to what? To posting scientific facts?
Get the fuck out of here.

[Anonymous No.4810189]

>>4810134
>Jesus, you don't even know anything about scientific method, do you?

That much is obvious.

He's continued to ignore the scientific proof posted that consciousness affects matter, so that alone is reason to ignore the troll.

[Anonymous No.4810187]

>>4810166

Nobody here believes in a soul either, you pathetic autistic fuck. How come you show both the negative social traits of an isolated genius and the scientific ignorant of a spoiled unintelligent brat?
I call Cartman-syndrome on this one.

[Anonymous No.4810192]

>>4810183
So you believe in fairy tales with absolutely no evidence? Only children and retards do this. Occam's razor is logic.

>>4810187
Stay stupid, faggot. You post ad hominems to hide your lack of evidence for your shitty position that has been debunked by science.

[Anonymous No.4810193]

>>4810181

Then why do you need words other than the ones of the phsycical particles?

ITS NOT AN ICECREAM ITS JUST MOLECULES I KNOW SCIENCE LOL

This is exactly how stupid you are, and how stupid you sound.

[Anonymous No.4810194]

>>4810124
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ockham/#4.1

:]

[Anonymous No.4810195]

>>4810189
>consciousness affects matter
About as much as unicorn farts affect matter.

[Anonymous No.4810197]

>>4810140
>I know more about the scientific method than you, faggot.

Nah, you don't. You're obviously the least educated person in this thread right now. It's amusing. Keep shouting faggot though, that helps.

>For example I know that magic is not part of the scientific method.

*shrug* And?

Quantum physics uses the scientific method when proving things with an experiment, like the double slit.

You are wrong.

Anymore?

[Anonymous No.4810201]

>>4810192

I just came with the evidence. Nobody ever mentioned a soul, yet you say that we do. The evidence is on this very board.

[Anonymous No.4810202]

>>4810148
>Are you fucking dense?

I really don't think it's just that.

I think he has a personality disorder as pointed out previously.

[Anonymous No.4810205]

>>4810193
Give me a scientific definition of consciousness. That's right, you have none. At least none that isn't circulare and doesn't need other unfalsifiable supernatural terms.

>>4810197
You are too stupid to understand the double slit experiment. Leave /sci/.

>>4810201
Where's the evidence. Link to the post please. I don't see it.

[Anonymous No.4810207]

>>4810153

Perfect summary of my understanding of this individual as well.

Too educated to realize how stupid he truly is and how he sounds to the rest of us.

Dime a dozen though, honestly. /sci/ is swarming with these kids.

[Anonymous No.4810210]

>>4810205

Give me a scientific definition of an ice cream. Also READ EVERY SINGLE POST AND YOU WILL SEE THAT NOBODY HAD EVER SAID THEY BELIEVED IN A SOUL.

[Anonymous No.4810211]

>>4810148
"WHAT IS SEMIOTICS AND NOMENCLATURE MEAN?"

[Anonymous No.4810215]

>>4810155

>insists we stop calling it consciousness and start calling it 'electrical signals'

HAHAHAHAHAHA


Oh God.

Okay kiddo, so we're all just going to rewrite the terminology of science to make you happy. We'll do that.

Instead of laugh at you.

[Anonymous No.4810221]

>>4810202
>not believing in magic is a peronality disorder
Sure is christfag in here.

>>4810207
Wait a sec. YOU are the retard who believes in magic. I am presenting the scientific facts against it.

>>4810210
There's no difference between "consciousness" and "soul". Both are words only used by ignorant retards and refer to non-existent "metaphysical" shit we don't need in science.

>>4810215
You still can't provide a scientific definition of "consciousness". I know you can't because that shit has no place in science. We have biochemistry to explain the brain, we don't need magic.

[Anonymous No.4810226]

>>4810187
>Nobody here believes in a soul either, you pathetic autistic fuck.

He really is pathetic.

He's used the term 'religiontard' 'soul' and 'magic' when discussing consciousness.

He continues to dismiss quantum physics as 'mysticism'.

I'm just going to step back and let him roast like the fat little piggy he is. Looking forward to seeing the rest of you brutalize his anus.

[Anonymous No.4810229]

itt: people being retards

there is no soul, what we refer to as "I" "you" "me" are simply nomenclatures.

[Anonymous No.4810222]

>>4810211

>What is mean.

all my jimmies

[Anonymous No.4810234]

>>4810221

>"consciousness" and "soul".

The difference is that the soul is describing something metaphysical, conciousness a phenomenum.

[Anonymous No.4810235]

>>4810226
You consistently fail to show me any evidence of that "consciousness" and your idiotic failure of understanding QM is pathetic.

[Anonymous No.4810238]

>>4810193
>ITS NOT AN ICECREAM ITS JUST MOLECULES I KNOW SCIENCE LOL

>This is exactly how stupid you are, and how stupid you sound.

Agreed. Nailed it.

>THE SKY ISN'T BLUE YOU MAGIC FAGS LOL
>IT'S BLUE BECAUSE THE LIGHT SPECTRUM IS DOING STUFF IN THE SKY AND ELECTRONS
>ALSO OCCAMS RAZOR FAGS LOL

We are no longer allowed to say the sky is blue.

[Anonymous No.4810239]

>>4810221
I already did, dilettante. Just because you petulantly repudiate my explications doesn't mean they're invalid.

[Anonymous No.4810240]

>>4810229

nomenclatures aren't real, then? Jesus you have no intuitive mind. Stay in your lab.

It is your perception of what "real" means that demonstrates no understanding of epistomology and science in any kind of perspective.

[Anonymous No.4810245]

>>4810234
>conciousness a phenomenum.
Show me that phenomenon. Show me it's effects or any evidence. There is none.

>>4810239
You did nothing other than showing what a retard you are. If science is too hard for you, you can still go to /x/. It might be a better place for you.

[Anonymous No.4810248]

>>4810240
they're real only insofar as to make a point, they have no concrete existence

[Anonymous No.4810260]

>>4810245

Show me the evidence for electrons.
Show the evidence for you to be able to claim it as evidence.

[Anonymous No.4810255]

>>4810248

>they're real only insofar as to make a point, they have no concrete existence

Just like everything else with no execptions.
Science is not about what the world is, but how it works.
But I guess the main asspie of this thread is too stupid to realize that.

[Anonymous No.4810257]

>>4810234
>>4810245

You both mispelled and misused the term phenomena, without skipping a beat, and while also trying to sound scientific.

This should be proof enough that trollfag is a troll, and also painfully retarded.

You're in over your head, kid. Keep going though, this is fun.

[Anonymous No.4810267]

>>4810255
No. There are differences. For example: invisible pink unicorn or god or soul (christian/jew/islam version). None of those have any grounds. The self grounds itself with the body/the personalities/the feelings/thoughts/etc.

[Anonymous No.4810269]

>>4810260
Your inane philosophy trolling is futile. Fact is that you are desparately trying to distract from having to answer my qeustion. I'll ask you again. Show me the evidence.

[Anonymous No.4810270]

>>4810257

Or perhaps because we live in a country where we don't speak english and just assume that understanding the meaning of the words is enough.
Considering the high amount of autism on this board, I should have checked on google translate, I admit.

[Anonymous No.4810274]

>>4810245
Could you be a tad more inspired with your impudent replies? You're sort of sequaciously abusing the same terminology here.

[Anonymous No.4810272]

>>4810245
>Show me that phenomenon. Show me it's effects or any evidence. There is none.

I already posted THE CONCLUSIVE experiment which has proven observable phenomena caused by consciousness, or "observation".

If I could go back in time and slip pills into your mothers drink to abort you, I would.

I totally would. I would rather someone like you never existed at all than bother killing you.

[Anonymous No.4810279]

>>4810272
Are you really that fucking retarded? Quantum mechanics doesn't need a magical "consciousness", it only needs an observer and this observer can be any machine, be it an articial or a biological machine.

[Anonymous No.4810280]

>>4810267
>>4810269

But how do you find an evidence for existance?

[Anonymous No.4810281]

He's continuing to demand evidence while ignorant that which was already presented.

Proof that we win. He is just licking his wounds at this point and will wait until the thread slows down to sulk off and be stupid somewhere else.

This was fun.

[Anonymous No.4810285]

>>4810269

Not before you have defined evidence.

[Anonymous No.4810290]

>>4810285
Look it up in a dictionary, retard.

[Anonymous No.4810287]

>>4810274
It's faggots like you who abuse terminology by claiming their magic bullshit to be science.

>>4810281
Care to link to the post containing evidence? There is none ITT.

[Anonymous No.4810288]

>>4810279

The experiment proves that electrons are conscious themselves and respond to the observation of ANY perceiving instrument.

What's your response to this?

INB4 explosion of autism and butthurt.

[Anonymous No.4810297]

>>4810279
You do realize that quantum mechanics can only be quantified through a prioric constructs, right?

[Anonymous No.4810292]

>>4810287
>>4810287
>>4810287
>>4810287
>>4810287

I'm not pasting the link again. You lose.

Goodday sir.

[Anonymous No.4810295]

>>4810288
0/10

[Anonymous No.4810303]

>>4810290

The dictionary only list words which meaning many people have agreed on. That does not make the meaning of them more true. Just because several billion people believe in a soul doesn't mean it exists either.

[Anonymous No.4810302]

>>4810292
So you have no evidence? That's what I thought. Now go be a retard somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.4810307]

Question for the autist.

How is the double slit experiment invalid here?

If electrons respond differently whether they are being observed or not, how does this dismiss consciousness?

Waiting.

INB4 quantum physics = magic because you don't understand it. Please try harder.

[Anonymous No.4810305]

Once cognitive science and neuroscience start to make some real progress. Well then we'll have real psychology but psychology as it exists today won't really exist anymore.

[Anonymous No.4810309]

>>4810287
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2626162/

What I mentioned earlier, but you were too lazy to research yourself.

[Anonymous No.4810314]

>>4810309
This has nothing to do with a magical "consciousness". That term doesn't even appear in your link.

[Anonymous No.4810319]

>>4810314

But nobody ever spoke of a "Magical consciousness".
Only you did.

[Anonymous No.4810326]

>>4810319
What are you even debating?

[Anonymous No.4810320]

>>4810314

Answer my question. How is the double slit experiment invalid in this topic?

It was performed with scientific procedures. The results are peer reviewed.

This IS science, this is hard facts - if you insist on dismissing science as 'magic' so be it, you are admitting defeat.

If you'd like to ACTUALLY debunk the double slit experiment, go for it.

Waiting.

And again - INB4 simply dismissing the entire thing as mysticism. Read the beginning of this post. You are not allowed to dismiss science as magic just because you're losing an argument on the internet.

[Anonymous No.4810328]

>>4810314
You'll find that its contents conform elegantly with my arguments herein. Also, way to not read the evidence provided(as demonstrated by the brevity in between your response), dumbass

[Anonymous No.4810333]

You demanded evidence, troll.

It was provided. Scientific peer reviewed evidence. This is not textbook material.

You were provided this material, now I am still waiting for you to disprove it.

[Anonymous No.4810335]

>>4810328
Why should I bother reading something unrelated? You want to argue that some magical shit named "consciousness" exists, yet you fail to show me any evidence. The article you linked is talking about other things. You're not gonna waste my time with these strawmen.

[Anonymous No.4810337]

>>4810333
Where? I don't see it. Show me the post. And it better not be that faggot troll who intentionally misinteprets the double slit experiment.

[Anonymous No.4810339]

>>4810335
Could you explain what those other things are?

[Anonymous No.4810340]

I can literally feel the troll quivering with weakness at this very moment.

Evidence was provided, he's had it explained to him that he can't simply wave off quantum physics as "magic" when experiments are done with scientific curriculum and peer reviewed studies are involved.

Now he's fucked.

This should be good.

INB4 troll continues to ignore our pleas for an actual debate and slinks off to be inbred and stupid somewhere else.

Please troll, don't go yet.

[Anonymous No.4810341]

>>4810335

>Gets presented proof
>tl;dr

Thread's over, the guy admitted he was trolling. 7/10 though.

[Anonymous No.4810344]

>>4810280
Only thing that we can know to exist for sure is the perceptual objects. "Chair"/"Car"/"Computer"/etc. All of them are seen to have existence because they can be directly accessed via perception. There is also mental constructions involved with perceptual objects, there are 2 types. Imagination and Concept. Imaginations constructs are free from common sense/logic/perception. Concept constructs are bound to common sense/logic/perception.

I.E
Imagination constructs: God/Soul/IPU (god/soul/ipu is outside the universe, thus not bound to logic)

Concept constructs: Self/Chair/Car (self is constructed of body/feelings/thoughts/memory/personality/etc) (chain is composed of wood/paint/nails/etc) (car is composed of engine/bodykit/wheels/exhaust/etc) (all of those parts can be taken to extremely small concept constructs.

The self is no different from cars/chairs/computers. The self is different from god/soul/ipu.

[Anonymous No.4810345]

>>4810341
also

>gets presented proof in a peer reviewed scientific study
>dismisses it as 'magic' without a moment's hesitation
>insists whoever provided that evidence must be trolling

WOW

This is the biggest fail I've seen on /sci/ all day.

He should have just left after everyone pointed out how stupid he sounded.

[Anonymous No.4810346]

>The self is no different from cars/chairs/computers. The self is different from god/soul/ipu.

I agree with you completely. But how do you proof that the objects exists?

Not saying that you should be able to, just that you can't do it.

[Anonymous No.4810349]

>>4810339
No and I won't bother reading something unrelated.

>>4810340
Hey you fucking retarded piece of shit. Quantum physics has no magic in it and just because you are too retarded to understand it, it won't become magic.

>>4810341
That paper contains no proof, it doesn't even contain the word "consciousness".

>>4810345
Troll harder, asshole.

[Anonymous No.4810347]

>>4810333

Trip 3's have spoken.

Troll has yet to redeem himself in any way.

The fat little piggy is starting to smell like bacon.

[Anonymous No.4810350]

>>4810347
>dat obvious samefag

[Anonymous No.4810351]

>>4810349
"Could you explain what those other things are?"
Yes, can you?

[Anonymous No.4810355]

>>4810346
The proof is that we can seemingly point to something that is said to exist. There will never be a complete proof of any existence, because the deeper we go, the more confusing it gets(wavefunctions etc).

[Anonymous No.4810353]

>>4810351
Whatever, some neuroscience results. I don't care as it is unrelated to the discussion.

[Anonymous No.4810354]

>>4810349

Exactly what I thought.

He's cooked.

You didn't even put up a good struggle this time, piggy. Ah well. We didn't expect much from you anyway.

[Anonymous No.4810358]

>>4810355
Show me the evidence of its existence. There is none.

[Anonymous No.4810364]

>>4810353
Oh, thank you for your concession by default.

[Anonymous No.4810370]

>>4810349
>No and I won't bother reading something unrelated.

Then read the double slit experiment.

Electrons respond differently while under observation. This is proven. The act of observation or being AWARE of being observed is consciousness.

Your rebuttal?

"Derp no magic in quantum physics".

Okay, that is not a rebuttal.

Your actual rebuttal? How does the double slit experiment NOT demonstrate consciousness?

How is it NOT evidence?

Cmon lil piggy, you can do it.

I know you're still here.

[Anonymous No.4810373]

>>4810364
You know what? I don't even give a fuck anymore. Why should I bother correcting you? You're gonna stay retarded and you deserve it. I have better things to do than debating retards. Anyway I have to go to bed soon. My mother is gonna shut down the computer.

[Anonymous No.4810376]

>>4810370
Show me how it does. You don't even have a defintion of consciousness. It's your burden of proof.

[Anonymous No.4810379]

>>4810358
>Show me evidence of car
>well cars are made up of car parts
>show me evidence of those parts
>atoms
>show me evidence for atoms
>quarks
>show me evidence of quarks
>quantum field
quantum field seems to be the end for now, and at this point we can say its is undetermined. It can't be said to not exist, nor can it be said to exist. It also cant be said to be both existing and not existing. Undetermined is not a state, its a lack of state.

[Anonymous No.4810386]

>>4810379
You could easily show me a car. Now do the same with "consciousness". I dare you.

[Anonymous No.4810388]

guns.

[Anonymous No.4810384]

Why even bother demanding evidence from people if you're not smart enough to use it?

You were just bluffing.

And I really hope

>>4810373

is not actually you. If so, I'm reporting for underage ban.

[Anonymous No.4810396]

*sigh* He's so stupid, everyone.

So... so very stupid.

>>4810376

>Show me how it does.

I already explained.

Electrons respond differently while under observation. This is proven. The act of observation or being AWARE of being observed is consciousness.
Your rebuttal?

>>4810376
>You don't even have a defintion of consciousness.

I just gave you one and backed it up with a peer reviewed scientific study.

Now what?

Fuck you smell good right now.

[Anonymous No.4810391]

>>4810376
>The act of observation or being AWARE of being observed is consciousness.
That's a definition, I do believe.

[Anonymous No.4810394]

>>4810370
Do you know how we "observe" electrons? If you did you would understand why your argument is invalid.

[Anonymous No.4810402]

>>4810394

Explain.

Explain to me how electrons being aware of the fact that they are under observation, is not a demonstration of them having consciousness?

I'm waiting.

[Anonymous No.4810403]

>>4810384
You still haven't shown any evidence, retard.

>>4810391
Now define "aware". That's just another magic bullshit term.

[Anonymous No.4810408]

>>4810402

[Anonymous No.4810410]

The sad thing is I'm actually arguing on /sci/ with people about a scientific, peer reviewed study, an actual experiment proven in quantum physics which cannot be debunked.

I'm arguing this, with people on /sci/....

The fuck?

You can argue my conclusions, that's fine. But you've yet to do it.

You've YET to ACTUALLY make ANY argument against the case that electrons are conscious, based on this experiment.

[Anonymous No.4810415]

>>4810403

Fail.

You're not even trying now. You're just on a war of attrition.

Stop boring us.

[Anonymous No.4810424]

>>4810403

I asked you to disprove the evidence I posted.

You are now claiming there is no such evidence posted.

Stop being such a desperate autistic loser, take a deep breath - and let's really give this a shot.

If what I posted is NOT evidence, why not?

And remember, you are not allowed to dismiss an entire scientific field as 'magic' and still carry on in a scientific debate. The moment you do that, you concede defeat (which you've already done multiple times but we're just cooking you at this point).

Waiting.

[Anonymous No.4810425]

>>4810415
Way to admit your failure. You can't answer my question? Well then fuck off, because you are intellectually too limited for this discussion.

[Anonymous No.4810417]

>>4810410
We don't have to argue anything. You make a claim, so it's your burden of proof, moron.

[Anonymous No.4810419]

answer is STILL guns.

[Anonymous No.4810429]

>>4810402
You can't "see" the particles. To "see" them you need to place detectors into the interfering path. So it is not because you are looking. It is because there is a fucking detector in the path. So even it there were no one and just a machine recording the experiment it would still give the result like if it had been "observed"

[Anonymous No.4810430]

>>4810417
> You make a claim, so it's your burden of proof

My claim - consciousness is real.

My proof - electrons respond to observation as proven in scientific experiment, peer reviewed results, this is a fact.

Your rebuttal?

Still waiting.

[Anonymous No.4810437]

>>4810424
>you are not allowed to dismiss an entire scientific field as 'magic'

YOU FUCKING RETARDED PIECE OF SHIT. NO ONE EVER DISMISSED QUANTUM PHYSICS AS MAGIC. YOU ARE POSTING A RETARDED WRONG UNDERSTANDING OF QUATNUM PHYSICS DESPITE REPEATEDGLY BEING TOLD WHY YOU ARE WRONG AND STUPID. QM IS AND REMAINS A VALID AND HIGHLY INTERESTING FIELD OF SCIENCE AND YOU ARE DEFILING IT WITH YOUR HORRIBLE IDIOCY. I WANT YOU TO DIE SO BADLY. IF I COULD TRACK DOWN YOUR IP, I'D TRAVEL ALL THE WAY TO AMERIFAT LAND JUST TO BEAT THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF YOUR DISGUSTING FAT FACE.

[Anonymous No.4810440]

>>4810425

Look how scared he is everyone. The little piggly is just squealing at this point.

First you demand that we define consciousness.

I gave you that definition.

Do you really want me to define 'aware' now?

Use the same definition.

Now go, debunk my theory. Stop avoiding everything like a frightened little piggy. No more pointlessly demanding definitions and side stepping.

The material has been provided, all we're waiting for is for you to make an actual rebuttal.

Go.

[Anonymous No.4810441]

>>4810386
I'm not arguing for/against consciousness, but I can give a rough estimate.

Consciousness is a mental construct that describes the process of all the nervous system's electrical discharges throughout the body.

Lets just accept this and move on. There is no need to say electrons = consciousness or magic = consciousness.

[Anonymous No.4810445]

>>4810430
That's not a proof. I could easily post something unrelated as well and wrongly call it "proof".

[Anonymous No.4810447]

>>4810437

Look everyone! He thinks me being American has anything to do with his inability to debate scientific topics.

He's so rustled and buttfrustrated at his own failure he can't even contain himself!

[Anonymous No.4810448]

>>4810437
His autism level is over 9,000. It's like Chris Chan became a sententious pseudointellectual within the course of an hour.

[Anonymous No.4810446]

>>4810440
Again you fail to provide a consistent definition. Do you think you're gonna troll anyone this way?

[Anonymous No.4810450]

>>4810447
Yes, I'm fucking mad. But tomorrow I will be calm and you will still be stupid.

[Anonymous No.4810451]

>>4810445

How is the double slit experiment unrelated to consciousness when the entire premise is observation and it's affects, observation being an act of 'consciousness'?

Waiting.

[Anonymous No.4810458]

>>4810455
That guy was an obvious troll and this is not an intellectual debate.

[Anonymous No.4810454]

>>4810451
First of all you need to define what you mean by consciousness. You failed to do so.

[Anonymous No.4810455]

>>4810450

>Flips his shit on the internet because he got assraped in an intellectual debate
>Calls others stupid now

Yeah bro I'm pretty sure you're going to be stupid forever. Good luck with that.

[Anonymous No.4810456]

How many times has magic been said? Forty two! Forty two times!! Hahaha.

[Anonymous No.4810463]

sage

[Anonymous No.4810467]

>>4810446

Consciousness: The act of observing or being aware of being observed.

Awareness: Response or interpretation of something.

The electrons respond to observation. They are aware. Consciousness fits this definition as well.
Now what?

Any other excuses why your failure to say anything valid rests entirely on my shoulders?

Need any MORE definitions spelled out for ya?

How about some MORE reminders that links and evidence have already been posted?

Or you could just - you know - admit defeat now instead of side-stepping endlessly.

Nah, prob best to just keep side-stepping. Carry on.

[Anonymous No.4810472]

>>4810456

Hahahaha that is awesome.

[Anonymous No.4810477]

Definitions: Given.

Evidence: Given.

Rebuttals: Still waiting.

You realize it would be easier to just stop posting, right? That's the quickest and easiest way to lose this debate.

Because everytime you continue to side-step you're just losing the debate at a slower pace. Makes no difference though.

[Anonymous No.4810486]

>>4810458

I don't think he was deliberately trolling, although he was a troll.

Stupidity, when sincere, should be vanquished whenever possible, and I do believe this kid to be sincerely stupid.

[Anonymous No.4810494]

>>4810486
Do you really think he's that stupid? I mean look at his "definitions" >>4810467. Not even an autist could come up with such retardation. It must be a troll.

[Anonymous No.4810495]

So correct me if I'm wrong.

You demand definitions and evidence before a debate can be had.

Both are supplied.

Weren't we supposed to have a debate now?

Ah well. This is just as tasty.

[Anonymous No.4810502]

>>4810463
lol

[Anonymous No.4810507]

>>4810495
Cry harder.

[Anonymous No.4810509]

>>4810494

You're still talking to me, genius.

I hope you realize that calling me a troll doesn't change the fact that you are being totally dominated by me right now and have yet to lift a finger.

If you want to use dictionary definitions for consciousness and awareness:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/consciousness

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/awareness

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/conscious


Based on these definitions, explain to me how consciousness cannot exist - and how the double slit experiment fails to prove it?

Waiting.

[Anonymous No.4810513]

>>4810509

[Anonymous No.4810518]

>>4810515
>dat fuckin irony
Oh wait, autists don't see their own irony.

[Anonymous No.4810515]

>>4810494

True sign of an autist.

His behavior is pointed out as autistic throughout the entire thread. He doesn't seem to understand why, so he simply calls others (who haven't displayed ANY autistic traits) autist as well.

Now THAT is autism.

He is also rightfully called a troll for making retarded statements like "there is no such thing as consciousness" or "awareness".

He is now calling others 'troll'?

Now THAT is autism.

Finally, he actually has the ability to demand evidence and definitions be given to him multiple times while insisting they were not.

That's not just autism, that's a level of cognitive dissonance that comes only from being DREADFULLY WRONG.

[Anonymous No.4810519]

>>4810509
I have no clue what is going on in this thread but you have no clue about the double slit experiment.

[Anonymous No.4810521]

>>4810513

Hmm? Got something to say?

Are you just going to keep being autistic and acting like WE are the ones who are causing a scene here?

That would be very autistic of you, and therefore the right thing to do. So carry on.

[Anonymous No.4810525]

>>4810521
>dat sweet butthurt

[Anonymous No.4810526]

>>4810518

Exactly, which is why they never understand the difference between laughing with or being laughed at.

This is what allows them to go from being the retard in the room to sidling up next to others and trying to joke about someone else being retarded.

We can only look at them with pity.

[Anonymous No.4810527]

>>4810526
Well do you look at yourself with pity?

[OP No.4810530]

Psychology has about as much to do with the existence of consciousness as physics does with the the existence of the physical world. Behavioral economics is a science like any other, it draws conclusions about the way the world works from scientific observations, and behavioral economics is psychology. They can use theory to make accurate predictions about the real world, I recommend anyone who says otherwise to read the various NOBEL PRIZE WINNING RESEARCH on behavioral economics which involves PREDICTING BEHAVIOR BY PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODS

In short, your opinion doesn't matter because real scientists are actually doing work, people smarter than you who don't care about your opinion

/thread

[Anonymous No.4810533]

>>4810530
You are not OP.

[Anonymous No.4810534]

>>4810525
>>4810518

So this is what it's come to?

I would say well-played but to be honest you were no challenge at all. People like you who demand evidence, definitions etc. and deny them as they're presented have lost from the start, so it's easy to see you're going nowhere with it.

I provided everything you demanded and this is going to be the quality of your replies from here on out. Now you're just going to sulk in this thread and trash it with shitty one-liner replies until it dies so that nobody will witness your embarrassment.

Well, you know what the means, don't you?

Don't you?

[Anonymous No.4810541]

>>4810534
I seriously hope you are not trolling. If you were trolling, I'd have to admit that you won. But if you actually believe the shit you're posting, then I can laugh out loud at how much you deserve to be such a stupid failure.

[Anonymous No.4810542]

you haven't been able to scientifically improve conciousness and never will because it's woo-woo. All you retards will ever come up with are strawmans and invisible pink unicorns

When will you magical ape bitches ever evolve?

[Anonymous No.4810545]

>>4810541

Shh, it's okay.

I did win. And you did lose.

[Anonymous No.4810547]

>>4810545
Alright, well played, troll. You still lost. You lost time and sanity.

[Anonymous No.4810559]

>>4810547

*Shrug* I wasn't trolling. I beat you at an actual debate because you failed to debate at all.

I didn't even have to try.

I wouldn't blame you for feeling like you've been "trolled". When you're stupid I'm sure it feels like people are trolling you all the time.

And when you're stupid, you say shit like "there is no such thing as consciousness and awareness" and everyone will rightly label you as a troll.

I win.

You lose.

You lose at both trolling and debate.

That's a double victory for me.

And at this point I'm just rubbing your face in it because that's what faggots like you deserve after wasting everyone's time demanding they post evidence and definitions you never intended to go over anyway.

You fucking loooooser hahahahahahha. Feels so good.


>>4810437
>>4810437
>>4810437
>>4810437

I already 'won' all the way back there by the way. And again, I didn't win at trolling, I won the debate because it was obvious at that point you had nothing and were cracking from the strain of your own bullshitting.

[Anonymous No.4810565]

>>4810547

Pssst.

We made images like this for people like you.

Enjoy.

[Anonymous No.4810566]

>>4810559
>confirming my statement

How does it feel that you are obsessed with your "trolling" success?
You can't stop replying. Come on, troll me more. Make me butthurt.

[Anonymous No.4810568]

>>4810530
>>4810530
>>4810530

>this

This whole thread is
>prove conciousness

Well for physics to be valid
>prove the existence of the outside world

For any science to be science
>Prove causality, solve all problems Hume posed

Fuck off, none of this is in the domain of science, it's philosophy's metaphysical bullshit

Nice try Karl Popper

[Anonymous No.4810574]

>>4810568
It has been proven. Didn't you read the posts about quantum physics? Quantum physics proves consciousness.

[Anonymous No.4810580]

>>4810574
No. The "observer" is a machine that directly interacts with the photons, no human need be present. Double slit experiment will not be used for your shenanigans.

[Anonymous No.4810583]

>>4810580
The electrons are conscious because they are aware of being observed.

[Anonymous No.4810598]

>>4810580

The electrons respond to the act of being observed, whether by a mechanical or biological source, it makes no difference.

The electrons are therefore 'aware' by the definition of awareness.

Awareness is a property of consciousness.

What's the problem here?

Are you upset that science agrees with what was once a "philosophical" concept?

I really do not care. And neither does science.

[Anonymous No.4810617]

>>4810580
>no human need be present

Which takes humans out of the equation of consciousness altogether.

Which means consciousness is a universal element.

Which fits with the unified field theory of quantum physics.

Which bothers you because....

again, really don't care. It would be interesting to see someone actually disprove what has been effectively proven though, instead of just scoffing at it like peasants being told the world was round.

[Anonymous No.4810633]

^^^^
No, you are retarded and believe new age bullshit, or trying hard. I'm a philosopher not a scientist btw, but quantum mechanics has nothing to do whatsoever with psychology or consciousness, or atleast no one actually doing the research you are quoting:
believes what you said
or
is an actual scientist

[Anonymous No.4810637]

This is a trend all over /sci/ and again it's not about science it's about belief systems.

What you have on this board are people with beliefs, and because science is their ultimate authority they are in terrible denial if science clashes with their beliefs.

So they basically ignore the science and ignore evidence entirely, while pretending to still be involved in scientific discussions.

Nope.

Consciousness is a real and scientifically observable element.

It's 20 fucking 12, get with the times.

[Anonymous No.4810646]

>>4810633

Disprove me then.

Prove something.

Let's have an actual scientific discussion here. My definitions, evidence and conclusions have been provided.

Now debate me.

Or you could just say "no that's retarded" and continue coddling your fragile belief system.

I'm not here to coddle your belief system though, I'm here to discuss science.

So what do you have to offer, philosopher? Are you upset that philosophy and science might meet on equal grounds at some point? That's disgusting if true, and you can't honesty call yourself a philosopher if that's your attitude. Philosophy is about seeking the truth.

[Anonymous No.4810655]

>>4810633
>quantum mechanics has nothing to do whatsoever with psychology or consciousness

Wow you suck at philosophy. Do something else with your time.

[Anonymous No.4810663]

>>4810598
If all it takes for there to be consciousness is some sort of physical reaction, why reach for quantum weirdness? A rock falling due to gravity should be good enough since the rock is "aware" of the Earth since it is being pulled by the Earth's gravitational field. The electron does not "know" it is interacting with a classical device, it is just that interaction with a classical device results in the inability to exist in a superposition of whatever the classical device coupled to for the interaction because, well, classical things can't be in superpositions [with a classical thing being an objective of sufficient size and energy scales that diagonal terms of its density matrix die off far faster than the dynamic time of the system in question].

[Anonymous No.4810678]

>>4810663
>The electron does not "know" it is interacting with a classical device

At what point does a child "know" he is interacting with other conscious beings?

He has to become self conscious before that point, correct?

But is he not conscious BEFORE that point?

And is an electron likewise not self-conscious, but still conscious in some respect?

[Anonymous No.4810679]

>>4810633
this guy. do you even know what quantum mechanics mean?

[Anonymous No.4810680]

>>4810646
I don't care to be involved in this thread, I usually like to read the whole thing but this one is too long. I don't know where you side, but I don't doubt the existance of consciousness or the practicality of psychology. I am just stating QM is entirely unrelated, and I know because my friend is into the same new age bullshit and I have watched many a clip assessing the same bullshit and likewise many that clearly refute and point it out as bullshit. It IS entirely possible that consciousness is spread out like a field and we are only recieving it, not generating. However, involving QM as definitive proof is just plain lies.

[Anonymous No.4810686]

>>4810663

By the way, the "physical reaction" is a reaction that takes place from a non-physical action.

Observation of an object SHOULD BE a non-physical action, aside from light particles physically entering the eye or apparatus etc.

So if a non-physical act like observation can cause a physical reaction from an electron, what is the conclusion?

[Anonymous No.4810698]

>>4810680
> It IS entirely possible that consciousness is spread out like a field and we are only recieving it, not generating.

And if an experiment proves this?

It's not longer a possibility, it's a fact.

>However, involving QM as definitive proof is just plain lies.

How does involving an actual QM experiment that proved this basis a lie?

You are coddling your belief system. The best thing you can do at this point is tell yourself it's "new age" and bullshit, to avoid having to reconstruct your belief system.

Nothing new, and not an original reaction. It's the rare individual whose mind is fluid enough to accept truth WITHOUT having to dismantle their beliefs. You will likely call ANYONE with this capacity, "new age" and that's fine.

[Anonymous No.4810723]

>>4810686
You are misrepresenting observation. It is a purely physical interaction [which is often called measurement, observation, etc.] that causes wave function collapse. If it were not physical, it could not be accurately described by a purely physical theory.

>>4810678
So, why bother with quantum weirdness? The falling rock gives all the same stuff. It is the same type of interaction going on with electrons without the quantum tom-foolery [ok, maybe not the exact same type since electrons don't couple too strongly through gravitational interactions (just look at how light they are) and we are unclear as to whether or not there is a mediator particle for gravity].

[Anonymous No.4810732]

What happened to the times that we talked about the magic of consciousness? I miss those days.):

[Anonymous No.4810737]

>>4810732
magic of science is better

[Anonymous No.4810739]

>>4810698
IF an experiment proved it, but it didn't, definitely not the double slit experiment, and even if some other did then everyone would know. Lies. Artistic work of fiction and falsehood.

[Anonymous No.4810770]

>>4810739
>even if some other did then everyone would know

Uhh, no.

They would do what you and all the other plebs in this thread do and just roll your eyes and insist it's not true, completely ignoring the evidence.

[Anonymous No.4810778]

>Major in Psychology
>will probably go into law after BA
>Studying Behavior and personality development
>Use it to pick up women, win petty arguments, solve basic problems between people who lack proper discourse
>mfw when I watch /sci/ argue if psychology is a science

Its a soft science its that simple. Your arguments on consciousness prove that its a necessary field.

Oh and all of you arguing about consciousness not being real is hilarious I mean you would be laughed out of a neurology department

[Anonymous No.4810797]

>>4810770
Full retard, go suck on some cocks you mongrel shitskin instead of wasting precious electricity by typing your bullshit. No one is falling for your shit.

[Anonymous No.4810791]

>>4810739

People didn't believe in Gorillas until they could see them in person or the dozenth scientist observed them.

They were told about them all the time by natives though.


You really think the world just automatically adopts new paradigms after one scientific discovery?

The proof that we do not is in this thread. Most people are still in the dark ages.

[Anonymous No.4810804]

>>4810778
materialists are like that.

scientists != materialists
materialists != scientists

[Anonymous No.4810805]

>>4810778

Thank you.

Basically we're just living among a generation of guys who have watched one or two discovery channel documentaries in their life, maybe overheard or paid attention in HS once in a while, and this is the extent of their understanding of the world.

God help us.

[Anonymous No.4810813]

>>4810805
There is no God beyond the imaginations of people

[Anonymous No.4810809]

>>4810797

The truth tends to cause reactions like this.

Autistic fits.

[Anonymous No.4810833]

>>4810797

This is how mongrels act when you tell them the world revolves around the sun and not the other way around.

[Anonymous No.4810841]

>>4810809
AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM AUTISM

Learn some new words

[Anonymous No.4810864]

>>4810841

Keep saging the thread you got assraped in.

It's doing wonders.

[Anonymous No.4811763]

I keep seeing this one close-minded math evangelist in several threads, most notably the secular meditation one. Same typing style and everything. I wonder why?

[Anonymous No.4811802]

>>4811763
Not believing in magic == close-minded ?
Yeah, nah, you're retarded.

[Anonymous No.4811957]

bumpu