[ 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: 2.91 MB, 480x360, 1510191887523.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9284332 No.9284332 [Reply] [Original]

Give me a logical reason why humans have souls/conciusness/mind (whatever you wanna call it) but animals are biological robots.

>> No.9284336

>>9284332
God.

Try look at any molecular pathway and not believe in god.

>> No.9284360

>>9284332
spoilers

(we don't)
((and we're also animals))

>> No.9284374

>>9284332
Bicameralism operates with the same starting assumption you're starting from, that there's a fundamental difference between human consciousness vs. the cognitive processes of other animals in need of explaining.
It's borderline pseudoscience and not at all a standard psychology paradigm, but it makes for an interesting read anyway:
http://s-f-walker.org.uk/pubsebooks/pdfs/Julian_Jaynes_The_Origin_of_Consciousness.pdf
The tl;dr on that hypothesized difference is that mankind wasn't conscious at all for a large chunk of history and it was a special kind of behavior that emerged from the precursor of bicameralism where the two brain hemispheres were more distinct from each other and the right hemisphere basically shouted command hallucinations which the ancient non-conscious people would follow without any self-awareness, up until the point when society got large and complex enough for this way of acting to no longer work well (e.g. there would begin to be inconsistencies between what your own god was telling you to do vs. what everyone else's were telling them to do) and this crisis of complexity led to a breakdown where people started becoming self-aware and talking to themselves instead of automatically reacting to verbal brain activity from their god hemispheres.
Sounds crazy as fuck, but Jaynes does a good job qualifying heavily what he means by "conscious" and walking you through all the ways people today aren't conscious yet are still engaging in X cognitive activity e.g. he uses the example of driving a car where you're not really deliberately doing anything and just going off of habit and has you imagine ancient people as on auto-pilot in that same way except constantly for their entire lives.

>> No.9284376

>>9284332
We have the brain capacity to perform much more complex cognitive tasks than other animals. Thus we can deduce and conceptualise a lot more from a situation than an animal could. This we could see as "human" consciousness. Animals have a consciousness as well but far more basic towards procreation and survival instincts.

>> No.9284381

>>9284376
explain dolphins then.

many of what you call human, most animals also share it.

animals even enjoy music designed for their vocal ranges.

>> No.9284412

>>9284332
>implying every particle in the universe doesn't have a soul

>> No.9284413

>>9284332
Our brains simply can hold our instincts back enough that we have a limited type of free will in a sense.

>> No.9284421
File: 116 KB, 1152x1092, 1507866562202.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9284421

>>9284332
>implying people arent biological robots
>implying we don't just feel like we make decisions instead of actually making them
I feel bad for you, OP.

>> No.9284441

We almost certainly are biological robots, just very complex ones so there's an illusion of choice in the things we do. There's also the fact that anyone having this conversation is necessarily a human brain, so there's inherent bias in it. Eventually, advancing computing power will probably prove that humans are "robots" by the ability to predict a person's next thought or action based on all relevant variables.

>> No.9284453

>>9284381
dolphins: Social behaviour, learnt behaviour. These are still embedded towards survival.

Not going to say that dolphins aren't intelligent beings. But their brains are far less developed than humans on a cognitive level. Feel free to prove otherwise through cognitive experiments with dolphins and post your results here.

The enjoyment of music is a more universal concept than human hearing. Nature loves harmonics, animals love harmonics, as do humans.

But humans have the brain capacity to create much more complex music harmonies and non-harmonic compositions than animals.

>> No.9284718

>>9284332
>Give me a logical reason why humans have souls/conciusness/mind (whatever you wanna call it) but animals are biological robots.

Because animals are unable to ask that question.

>> No.9284731

complexity. consciousness is what happens when you have memory+prediction. Memory+prediction means you can see behind and in front of you 4 dimensionally. Basically consciousness is the ability to exist (functionally) in a higher dimension.

Animals are conscious too just not as, their memory isn't as good and their prediction is more specific instead of general.

Computers are going to be discovered to have been growing in consciousness since around 2012 (thats when some discoveries were made that allowed for neural networks to progress to where they are today)

Before some idiot brings it up I just want to address one really stupid common argument I see. Which is, that something mechanical/artificial cannot be conscious because it does not have intent. This is just stupid tbqh, consciousness is simply the perception component, it doesn't even have to do with WHY you might have memory or predict things. What matters is that you have memory and predict things.

Also every mind is conscious but not every consciousness is even close to what we'd consider a mind.

>> No.9285028

>>9284731
>redefine consciousness
>this argument is stupid because it doesn't fit my definition

>> No.9285042

>>9284332
I can't. Neuroscientists are pretty sure free will isn't real.

>> No.9285060

>>9284731
I think your definition of consciousness is wrong.

>> No.9285168

>>9284374
Got a lot of sympathy for this viewpoint, but it doesn't quite take into account the self-awareness in primates described more recently. My personal view based on nothing but my own observation is that it is a spectrum, a range from non-sentient to partly, through occasionally, etc.

>> No.9285190

>>9284332
>Give me a logical reason why humans have souls/conciusness/mind (whatever you wanna call it) but animals are biological robots.
I won't because it's not true. There are gradations of consciousness I suppose, but to dismiss the idea that animals have a conscious experience in one way or another seems absurd to me. Just because biologists are fucking brainlets doesn't mean animals can't act as a rational agent. We might be on top of the foodchain when it comes to brains, but let's not get arrogant and assume we're unique in out experience of existence.

>> No.9285225

>>9284332
>implying other animals don't have souls

>> No.9285254

>>9284332
>logical
>why

Logic just follows from the axioms. In the real world, the things just follow from what's there. I'm really not sure if there is a "why".

>> No.9285260

>>9284332
Animals definitely have soul/consciousness/mind, and have been known to express emotions outwardly. Dogs are a prime example of emotionally expressive animals. When you put dogs in an MRI and show them pictures of their owners, you see brain activation in regions analogous to the human brain regions associated with love. Similarly, dogs, dolphins and bonobos all exhibit aspects of altruism -- behaviors that are beneficial to other animals (even across species) with no immediate benefit to themselves. There is myriad evidence for animal intelligence, even if it doesn't necessarily reach human levels.

>> No.9285268

>>9284332
How is that a contradiction? Why can't you have a consciousness and still be a biological robot?

>> No.9285353

The way I see it, everything is alive, like animated in some way, and that increases in complexity as you go up the physical ladder. Quarks are doing things, atoms are doing things, plants, animals, galaxies, so on, all on planes of mediators like space and gravity. It's all alive, and a human mind, and I predict an artificial intelligence will as well, maybe to a more realized degree, is where the universe goes "oh, I'm here, I'm alive", and is conscious in the sense that we recognize it.

>> No.9285428

>>9284332
Adaptation of bio organic interplay over vast period of time. We are the supreme leader of survival of the fittest. Evolution.
It's natures gift for existence.
If the universe was a tree, then we are it's fruit.
All this is a code burried within the depts of the universe. It's a higher state for the universe to interract with itself.

>> No.9285499

>>9284336
Where does this god say that animals don't have souls? What evidence do you have that this god has ever communicated to humans in any fashion whatsoever?

>> No.9285524

>>9284332
We are also biological robots.

>> No.9285541

>>9284332
>souls/conciusness/mind
Animals have that, they only don't have abstract thinking.

>> No.9285553

>>9284332

Who said animals don't have souls?

>>9285541

>no abstract thinking

Well, they might not paint pictures or play the lute, but they sure as hell can show fear, hatred, protection, affinity, and loyalty. That's more than a lot of humans I know.

>> No.9285554

>>9285524
HUMAN
ROBOT

>> No.9285559

>>9285553
>That's more than a lot of humans I know.
Maybe because you have disastrous social skills so you only get to know other people in a very shallow sense.

>> No.9285562

>>9284336
>Try look at any molecular pathway and not believe in god.
Alright, like many other I have and don't see any evidence of a god. Weird.

>> No.9285564

>>9285499
it doesnt.
but its an easy way to not fail any question when you just fill the gaps with "god did it"

>> No.9285565

>>9284332
>>9285190
“I think human consciousness was a tragic misstep in evolution. We became too self-aware. Nature created an aspect of nature separate from itself. We are creatures that should not exist by natural law. We are things that labor under the illusion of having a self, this accretion of sensory, experiencing feeling, programmed with total assurance that we are each somebody when, in fact, everybody’s nobody.”

>> No.9285566

>>9284336
I didn't see anything extraordinary

>> No.9285567

>>9285559
thats not the point he was trying to make and you know it

>> No.9285569

>>9285559

>slams social skills
>posting in /sci/ on a friday

You'd better be a newfag.

>> No.9285570

>>9285565
thansk rustin now gimme a sip of that lone star

>> No.9285572

>>9285567
He was trying to say that there are a lot of shitty people who are worse than animals.

If you meet a single asshole, that doesn't mean much. You just met an asshole.

If you meet MANY assholes, chances are you're the asshole.

>> No.9285575

>>9285569
are you australian ? or nz ?

>> No.9285576

>>9285569
Nigger it's not even 3pm. The "it's friday, why are you on 4chan instead of partying?" routine doesn't work this early in the day.

>> No.9285579

>>9285225
>Catholics
>catholisicsim

>> No.9285580

>>9285569
Why the homophobia?

>> No.9285581

>>9285572
>That's more than a lot of humans I know.
that was just a witty outro. i think what anon was trying to say is that we share too much similarites with animals to ignore them. meaning animals dont have big questions or build civilizatiosn because their brains are underdeveloped compared to us but thats about it.
i might be wrong tho. it happens a lot

>> No.9285590

>>9285581
>fear, hatred, protection, affinity, and loyalty
>more than a lot of humans I know
If you know "a lot" of people who lack such basic qualities as these, then the problem is definitely with yourself.

Such people doubtlessly exist, but nobody knows "a lot" of them. Such degenerate freaks are the very rare exception.

>> No.9285592

>>9285590
cool
what about the other part of the post(s) ?

>> No.9285593

>>9285580
Lol.

>> No.9285600

>>9285590
You keep addressing the least relevant part if each post only. Why?

>> No.9285604

>>9285600

I think it's called b8.

He certainly can't address the salient points. He'll probably grammar whore when given the opportunity. Sounds like a bored girl.

>> No.9285615

>>9284332
>Give me a logical reason why humans have souls/conciusness/mind (whatever you wanna call it)
Fluctlight
>but animals are biological robots.
They are, and so are a lot of humans.

>> No.9285634

>>9285042
Ya they're forced to study it by God or something

>> No.9285659

>>9285604
Yeah I had an "if" instead of an "of" and i was waiting for it.

>> No.9285669

>>9285634
You seem to mischaraterize lack of free will

>> No.9285873

>>9285669
The difference?

>> No.9285889

>>9285669
So it's you have free will and are responsible for your choices. Or you "lack free will" and suck aids dick for no reason?

>> No.9285932
File: 446 KB, 300x186, 4edd1a35-4ff1-40b1-b7cc-15980bd41e73.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9285932

>>9284360
Thank you Anon.
I don't know why souls are even considered as true, and given that no-one can agree on a definition of consciousness, only that "we have it and animals probably don't".

Until someone properly defines consciousness and demonstrates why animals cannot have it, it may as well be woo-woo.

>> No.9285995

>>9285669
Hope I get a conscious free willed answer from you. Or is it gonna be a lack of choice unperceived response.

>> No.9286002

>>9285995

The answer he gives is the Will of God.

I'm going to back to worship the number 82. At least we know that's real.

>> No.9286018

>>9284332
Claustrum and quantum skittles in your microtubules.

>> No.9286028

>>9286002
numbers are not real anon
worship the sun or a cat or anything else

>> No.9286067

>>9286002
Probably, this Jerry doesn't know if he's real.

>> No.9286098

>>9285559
Dude we're on 4 chan. That applies to everyone here

>> No.9286125
File: 11 KB, 670x473, Brain_size_comparison_-_Brain_neurons_(billions).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9286125

>>9284376
>this is what humans believe
Your intelligence is collective and cultural.

>> No.9287353

>>9285580
Let it rip!

>> No.9287745

>>9284376
>>9284453
I think it's dangerous to base your definition of consciousness so heavily on ability. Consciousness to me seems more just about subjective experience. Like, from an ethical view, what would happen if hyper-intelligent aliens came to earth? Would they be justified in stomping us like bugs, because they are so much more capable at everything? I don't think so.

>>9284731
The "discoveries" that advanced neural networks to where they are today are not theoretical (i.e., advancements in how we view statistical pattern recognition), but computational. Neural networks, backpropogation, and the frameworks for using them to classify data have been around since the 80's, it just wasn't feasible to train these giant deep networks until we were able to leverage the high-power parallel capacity that GPUs have.

>> No.9287781

>>9286125
Now divide that by bodymass and get back to me, also brain size =! k * intelligence. Different animals have different allocations of brain mass to different areas. Almost all animals devote a bigger proportion of their brains to movement control than we do.

>> No.9287784
File: 28 KB, 1357x800, iq_by_country.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9287784

>>9284332
we can define soul as an IQ score over 100

>> No.9287790
File: 41 KB, 387x544, St_Thomas_Aquinas.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9287790

>>9286125
>Your intelligence is collective and cultural.
then why are other social animals dumber than us?
Checkmate atheists :^)

>> No.9287795

>>9284332
>tfw crows have an intelligence comparable to niggers
>literally just making noises at a corpse because they don't understand what death is

>> No.9287890

>>9284421
I agree, but isn't the act of feeling worth investigating? I'm pretty sure my dog feels like it's making decisions, but do fish or ants feel anything? What kind of gradient is in between?

>> No.9288057

>>9287790
language

>> No.9288072

>>9288057
>and whence cometh language?
Checkmate :^)