[ 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: 136 KB, 343x443, 1268101170469_20131031153428369.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6175490 No.6175490 [Reply] [Original]

Is consciousness supernatural?

>> No.6175519
File: 35 KB, 450x450, 1384569816803.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6175519

There is no detachment from nature as there is no detachment from the whole. There is only nature; the whole.

>> No.6175522 [DELETED] 

>>6175519
Nature is God.

>> No.6175524

>>6175522
Exactly. Nature is that which cannot be described. Living in the present is the only way of understanding. By naming it you fail to understand.

>> No.6175540

>>6175519
All you're saying is that you don't believe in the supernatural.

but thats just ur gay opinion bro

>> No.6175542

It seemingly exists outside of empiric reality, does that make it beyond scientific explanation? I dont know.

>> No.6175545

>>6175490
Depends if there is a definitive way to measure consciousness

>> No.6175548

Is unconsciousness natural?

>> No.6175560

>>6175522
god is love

>> No.6175564

>>6175548
It is. I've long stood by the philosophy of the observer. Does something exist if there is no one around to observe it? Quantum Mechanics has really proven the significance of the observer in the universe. Al the math and beauty in the universe is lost if there is no observation of it.

>> No.6175565

>>6175560
Love is gravity.

>> No.6175567

How to consciousness:
Is this question being asked?
If yes, consciousness do.

>> No.6175587

God is nature.

>> No.6175590

>>6175587
How contributional. Fuck off already.

>> No.6175604

>>6175564
Please don't mention that. I mean already with Schrodinger's cat experience making some morons think that natural phenomena can't happen without a conscious observer, we don't need any new bullshit. However other physicists made a fair point claiming the "observer" can honestly be anything, even an atom.

So something small I thought off, we all wondered why that one day, the singularity before the Big Bang just started expanding randomly at some point, why? Well there was probably an observer that cost this natural phenomena to happen, something did it. All hail whatever the fuck did it.

>> No.6176193

>>6175564
>Quantum Mechanics has really proven

Whenever a sentence starts with these words, we can be sure it's philosophical mumbo jumbo and the poster does not actually understand QM.

>> No.6176219

I think the sun is the source of our consciousness.

>> No.6176957

I think it is.

>> No.6177695

That's the prevailing opinion.

>> No.6177869

>>6176193
Anything mentioning proof that's not math.

>> No.6177878

>>6176219
What is a sun, metaphorically?

>> No.6177899

>>6175490

Supernatural doesn't mean anything. If it exists, it's natural.

>> No.6177902

>>6175490

Define consciousness.
Define supernatural.

>> No.6177934

Past philosophers like Descartes believed the structure of consciousness to resemble a quadratic polynomial of the form ax^2 + bx + c, but recent research has led to a very complex method for determining the roots of such equations, and little has been learned about consciousness in the process. Now, most contemporary philosophers, e.g. Searle, believe that the paradox of the triple integral is responsible for consciousness, and certain fields of research, such as the hermeneutics and lexical properties of triple integrals, as well as their exegetical ontology, look very promising.

>> No.6177950

>>6177899
By supernatural i mean something that exists but science cant explain.

>> No.6177952

>>6177902
>consciousness
The experience of consciousness

>supernatural
What exists outside of empiric reality.

>> No.6177997

>>6177950
If it exists then science can explain it.

>> No.6178014

>>6177950
natural is defined as existing within our universe. Science is, so far, the best method of obtaining an understanding of reality. Even if there is no scientific explanation for a phenomenon currently, it is sciences' job to continue developing our understanding of reality until we can explain it.

For something to be "supernatural" it would have to be outside our universe, so it would be literally unknowable. We know "consciousness" exists in our universe because we define ourselves as conscious. Over time, we will either explain the phenomenon or redefine the term based on a better understanding of it

>> No.6178030
File: 11 KB, 300x278, 1373128819359.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6178030

>>6177997
You cant prove that

>> No.6178059
File: 7 KB, 225x225, Minchin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6178059

>>6178030
throughout history
every mystery
has turned out to be
NOT MAGIC

>> No.6178068

>>6178059
>appeal to tradition

>> No.6178369

>>6175490
Consciousness is chemical.
Yeah, that's about it.
Also if you're going to come up with some half assed response like how you're not talking about thought patterns or whatever, fuck off, yes you are. Anything beyond that is an illusion set up by your brain in order to keep your ass alive.

>> No.6178378

>>6175490

>waifu
>>>/a/

>qualia
>>>/lit/

>physiology
>>>/lit/

>supernatural
>>>/x/

Fuck off. You are not welcome.
Just get out.

>> No.6178381

>>6178369
>Consciousness is chemical.

untested theory

>> No.6178384

>>6178369
What chemicals do I have to mix in my test tube to create consciousness? Or will I need an Erlenmeyer flask?

>> No.6178398

>>6178381
>untested theory
Most logical assumption.
>>6178384
You'll need a shit ton of chemicals actually. Also a brain to interact with. And another brain to fill that gap empty space in your skull.

>> No.6178414

>>6178398
>Also a brain to interact with

So you're proposing interactionalist dualism? That's not very chemical.

>> No.6178412

>>6178378
You fuck off, you're not welcome.

Stop shitting up /sci/ with your posts telling everyone to fuck off because this isn't specific to your interests if no one wanted to post in it then the thread would die.

>> No.6178432

>>6178412

>What the fuck did you just fucking say about...
>>>/b/

Fuck off. You are not welcome.
Just get out.

>> No.6178437

>>6178414
No. I'm proposing that the consciousness is a physical/chemical reaction happening inside your brain. It's the work of neurons exchanging substances. There's nothing more.

>> No.6178443

>>6178437
If it is chemical/physical, it must be possible to reproduce it outside of a brain. Please demonstrate how.

>> No.6178446

>>6178437
You clearly don't know what a chemical reaction is. Are you underaged? You should have had your first chemistry class at age 14.

>> No.6178448

>>6178437
>It's the work of neurons exchanging substances

What kind of substances? And how does this give rise to subjective experience? How do you experimentally test subjective experience?

>> No.6178456

>>6178437
You solved http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explanatory_gap ?

Impressive!

Where did you publish your results? You're gonna win a Nobel prize for that.

>> No.6178460

>>6178443
It's called artificial intelligence. We're working to produce it.
but for the life of me, I don't get why so many people are fascinated with such simple shit. We're not really that complicated to figure out. The mind itself can be taken apart and studied easily. And when you observe that physically altering the brain in a specific way leads to altering thoughts and personality in another way and that you receive consistent results from this, it's hard to state that the mind and brain are separate.

>> No.6178462

>>6178446
Fine then, a biological reaction. Feel better. has the reich been satisfied?

>> No.6178463

>>6178460
Oh look, artificial intelligence is apparently another topic you're tremendously ignorant of. I seriously hope you're underaged.

>> No.6178465

>>6175519
There is no reason to believe that scientific observation is descriptive of the totality (or even any) of an objective reality

That's not to say the scientific method isn't useful, just that asserting the natural world is "the whole" is entirely without backing

>> No.6178466

>>6178448
>experience? How
>What kind of substances?
>>>Google
And subjective experience is an illusion. A sequence of programming that keeps us moving.

>> No.6178467
File: 82 KB, 750x600, full_retard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6178467

>>6178460
>but for the life of me, I don't get why so many people are fascinated with such simple shit. We're not really that complicated to figure out. The mind itself can be taken apart and studied easily

Yeah, I'm sure your sophomoric drivel totally revolutionizes neuroscience. The pseudo-philosophical edginess of your 14 year old mind definitely solved all the problems the most intelligent researchers in the field failed to tackle for decades. What unsolved problems are you gonna solve next? Do you have a cure for cancer as well?

>> No.6178473

>>6178466
>And subjective experience is an illusion

What entity is perceiving that illusion?

>> No.6178475

>>6178467
Enlighten me then. Explain to me what you're so right about.

>> No.6178480

>>6178059
Problem of induction

>> No.6178484

>>6178473
The brain.

>> No.6178485
File: 26 KB, 400x447, dumbass corner.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6178485

>>6178475
Why don't you link me to your peer reviewed publication? Show me the experimental design you applied to solve the hard problem of consciousness. Come on, show me science instead of teenaged sophistry!

>> No.6178489

>>6178484
How does it do that? How does subjective experience arise?

>> No.6178490

>>6178485
Again.
Explain to me what you're so right about.
Also who the fuck are you to judge anything?

>> No.6178501
File: 393 KB, 493x342, retard alert.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6178501

>>6178490
You promised us a scientific solution to the hard problem of consciousness. Please post it! Thousands of neuroscientists acknowledged that they failed to tackle the problem. Now we're all waiting for you, our underaged saviour, to post the solution! Go ahead and revolutionize science. We put our hope in you, boy genius!

>> No.6178499

>>6178489
Evolution?

>> No.6178506

>>6178499
Did you not even understand the question? I don't want to offend you, but at this point I seriously need ask: Are you diagnosed with any kind of disorder diminishing your cognitive abilities?

>> No.6178514

>>6178501
And again you offer nothing more than meaningless bullshit and no information of your own.
I don't have any answers to most of the questions in this life but I can try. You on the other hand, are an idiot. At least you're proving to be one.
Also never promised anything.

>> No.6178518

>>6178506
I answered your question however I knew. How about you tell me your version?

>> No.6178527

>>6178514
How am I supposed to provide information? I'm by far not as brilliant as you are. You are the poster who claimed the hard problem of consciousness was trivial and you claimed you know exactly how to explain and connect everything happening in mind and brain. A little bit outrageous, these claims. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, my dear "special" friend!

>> No.6178533

>>6178518
You didn't answer shit because you didn't understand the question. I asked you for a fucking mechanism, tard boy. Do you have a mechanism to propose? Do it. Tell me how subjective experience arises in the brain. Do you know what the word "how" means or do you need a dictionary?

>> No.6178541

>>6178527
Because an image board is definitely a place where people back shit up with studies.
Also they're called opinions. I get to have one and shit on you for trying to prove it wrong.
I think you're taking this a bit too seriously though.
Also you still haven't provided any information and are thus still a retard.

>> No.6178546

>>6178467
>>6178485
>>6178501
>>6178527
>>6178533
Stop wasting your time replying to the retard kid. He's obviously underaged and has no education whatsoever. Any attempt to explain the "hard problem" to him will fall of deaf ears. Just let him live in his infantile delusion of "lol conscousness is completely explained".

>> No.6178549

>>6178541
>opinions
>on a science board

You are wrong here. Fuck off back to /pol/ or /x/. On /sci/ we discuss science. Science is based on facts and doesn't give a shit about your feelings or fantasies.

>> No.6178550

>>6178533
The process of evolution allowed for brains that have the ability to manifest it. Is that hard for you to understand?
Also considering the complexity of explaining the actual mechanism, I think you wouldn't understand if I explained it to you.

>> No.6178553

>>6178541
>makes outrageous and blatantly idiotic claims about science
>gets told how fucking stupid he is
>"hurr durr muh opinions"

You are the cancer killing this board. And the worst thing is that you're probably not even "pretending" but actually are that deficient. Ignorance and arrogance are the worst combination.

>> No.6178554

>>6178549
You still haven't answered any of my questions then. Also there are no facts when dealing with consciousness since it's not fucking real.

>> No.6178555

>>6178553
Resorted to name calling now? Sad. Also durr hurr, you're stupid, isn't constructive at all. If you'd bring up something useful to prove me wrong with I'd listen.

>> No.6178556

>>6178550
>Also considering the complexity of explaining the actual mechanism, I think you wouldn't understand if I explained it to you.

You're pathetic. You now realized that you don't know the mechanism. That's okay, because in fact nobody does. But your reaction is purely disgusting. I seriously hope one day you will grow up and you'll look back and reflect your behaviour, being ashamed of what an immature shitbag you used to be.

>> No.6178559

>>6178555
Constructive? This thread stopped being constructive at the very moment you entered it and started to parade around your belligerent ignorance.

>> No.6178558

>>6178556
But it's so fun watching you cringe!

>> No.6178562

>>6175490
Sage and report guys

>> No.6178565

>>6178559
No facts were given to contradict my bullshit.
The only thing you did was resort to insults. Also I'm actually not trying to parade anything.
I just threw a rock and you yelled at it.

>> No.6178567

>>6178558
Was that post really necessary? After you embarrassed yourself throughout this thread by constantly being called out for you lack of intelligence and education, you now felt the need to show us that in addition you also happen to be socially crippled?

>> No.6178570

>>6178565
>openly admits talking nothing but "bullshit"
>still shifting the burden of proof

This is getting more and more pathetic.

>> No.6178571

>>6178567
I actually am socially crippled. And no that wasn't necessary.
But I have no friends so I have nothing better to do than poke you with a stick.

>> No.6178575

>>6178570
>still trying
Yes, it is.