Consciousness is an emergent property of neurons interacting with each other, just like how water is an emergent property of hydrogen and oxygen interacting with each other.
>>16564637Either he's a pzombine, a dumbass (not likely) or he's very bad with his choice of words.
>>16564637It's the only coherent position an intellectually honest materialist (NPC) can take. If more NPCs would admit they aren't conscious, it would make it much easier for real people to disregard their bot responses and explore the mysteries of reality amongst ourselves.
>>16564637Probably mirroring the way that people, once they understand how an AI system works, declare "it's not intelligence, it's just doing XYZ." It's like being inscrutable is part of the definition for them.
>>16564637He's absolutely right. You have no idea what you're talking about. Also, H2O is a molecule not a property lmao.
>>16564637*didHis fragment of consciousness has returned to the spirit world
>Consciousness is an emergent property of neurons interacting with each otherit's not, some stupid neurons can't create consciousness.>calls others retards>doesn't know what he's talking about
talking about physics, it is literally an illusion, it's something that can't be measured or explained.
consciousness created the universe, it doesn't emerge from shit.
>>16564792The stupid neurons did create your consciousness, so you're wrong.
>>16564800they literally can't, consciousness doesn't have physical properties, it created the illusion of neurons creating it.
>>16564805If it didn't have physical properties you wouldn't know about it
>>16564805Based and Bernardopilled
*hides post*
>>16564813it affects matter non-physically. kinda like entangled particles communicate instantly faster than light.
>>16564819Can't do that. If it affects physical things, it's physical. >kinda like entangled particles communicate instantly faster than light.You should have continued your education for more than an instant
>>16564805>they literally can't, consciousness doesn't have physical propertiesbro you literally need your brain to be conscious lol. no consciousness with not brain
>emergenceretarded pseudoscientific termEmergent phenomena like water/wetness/weather/whatever can absolutely be explained with the underlying elements, so "emergence" is really just a semantic tool. You could explain macroeconomics using only fundamental particles, but it would be completely incomprehensible to humans, hence we have created these "emergent" concepts, which are only linguistic tools and have nothing to do with science. Since this is a thinly veiled linguistics thread, fuck off to >>>/his/
>>16564831>In philosophy, systems theory, science, and art, emergence occurs when a complex entity has properties or behaviors that its parts do not have on their own, and emerge only when they interact in a wider whole.
>>16564832Late stage materialism: ghosts rise out of the machine for no reason
>>16564838Are you surprised that materialism successfully found the connections between two things which were previously thought to be unrelated?
>>16564821>has no argument>>16564826you need it, bc that's the illusion it created.it communicating with matter doesn't mean it has physical properties. is it too hard for faggots to understand?
>>16564846Argument for what, exactly? I already refuted you
>>16564846there's people who hit their head and go braindead or completely change personality. what in the god damned fuck are you on about?
>>16564857bc it needs to maintain the illusion, is it too hard for faggots to understand?
>>16564859the absolute state
it's very simple.all physical things follow mathematical rules. which easily means consciousness is not physical. any physical connections are just illusions.
Anyone who thinks consciousness is not physical turns out to be mentally retarded. Coincidence?
the only reason human consciousness needs a brain is because of evolution. it was just created that way.>>16564868you sound like a retard ofc you can't understand it.
>consciousness creates a completely new reality disconnected from the physical world>actually consciousness is physical hurr durr
>>16564637Well, not exactly sure why you need neurons for that, but pretty much.
>>16564637>Why do retards like him claim consciousness is an illusion?because they like to
>>16564637There are retards who think that if you live in simulation it would change something, and even retards who thinks that illusion is something worse than reality.
If consciousness is primordial then why does physics exist? why isn't it a world of pure nonsense? why is there logic at all? or laws of anything?
>>16564978simulets are a special breed of copers
>>16564981Most special breed are brains in a jar. You can make every simucorp admit that.
>>16564979You have the same problem if you assume physics is primordial. Why does anything exist at all, and why does it follow consistent laws? Physics has no answer, unless you just kick the can with multiverse theories and the anthropic principle, which are still subject to the same question.
>>16564637Water is not a “property”. Neither is “consciousness”. It’s a nominalisation of the adjective, “conscious” and as such, to non-faggot-Platonists, it doesn’t “exist”, at least not the same way as water. It’s beyond the realm of physics, imo.
>>16564988why implies a cause which implies time which started with the big bang. why is the wrong question
>>16564637>emergent property of neurons>emergentRetard.Consciousness isnt emergent, its foundational. Everything else is the emergent from consciousness.
>>16564979The world has a structure, just not one of the particles . The deeper structure of the universe is that of consciousness.
>>16564992>Everything else is the emergent from consciousness.how can you access this board and think like this lol
>>16564991>you're not allowed to ask why my worldview makes no senseCheckmate idealists.
>>16564990You meant your perception of water? Which exist in same plane as god does? And there's nothing more than your perception of stuff?
>>16564997You can do whatever you want I'm just pointing out the question is logical nonsense.
>>16564979>why isn't it a world of pure nonsense?then it's not a world and consciousness still needs evolution to create something coherent>>16564992you can say that specifically human consciousness is emergent from the physical world
>>16565000Fair enough, but I can assert the same. Consciousness, to the extent it transcends physicality, is not subject to time and causality either, in the same way as the state of the universe prior (for lack of a better word) to the big bang.
simplyconsciousness and human consciousness are different things. like the guy said with the water.consciousness is like the atoms H+O but human consciousness emerges like water properties do.
>>16564995What do you think entails thinking? Of perception? What do you think happens when you imagine that apple when you close your eyes? What do you think happens when you open your eyes? Everything is conscious driven, regardless of whether people think they have their eyes open or eyes closed. Whether they are dreaming or awake. Whether they can see clumps of particles called apple or imagine/dream of it. Varying degrees of lucidity isnt an indication of external world but merely an indication of the conscious agency. >>16565003>you can say that specifically human consciousness is emergent from the physical worldHow do you know anything about this world to make any statement? The first and primary inference is the consciousness. So its the consciousness that is at the helm. When a scientists looks through their microscope to look at atomic structure with their newest and latest electron microscope, they are not looking through with that tool. They are looking through with their consciousness at the helm. Every scientific measure, every time someone speaks, everytime someone perceives, everytime someone thinks, they are at the mercy of the conscious mind. If that conscious mind isn't clear, nothing will ever make sense. A mind that doesn't understand they are a mind cannot understand what is or what isn't anything else.
>>16565006>but I can assert the samemmnope you don't. I was talking about it logically. whatever you're saying has nothing to do with logic
>>16564994>physics metaphor
>>16565012>physics invented systemsLow IQ
>>16564978>>16564981>There are retards who think that if you live in simulation it would change somethingretard take. you should watch some any% speedruns faggots.
>>16565015Well, seems like the have some extra characters.
>>16564999It’s more to do with language and abstractions. Whatever we call consciousness is not denotatable. It’s like a fish trying to tell another fish what water is. We’d need another word category.
>>16565023It is.
The truth is that reality is an illusion.
>>16565030the words you use for it doesn't change its persistence or consequences. "reality"/"illusion" you can play with words however you want it still don't change shit anon.
>>16565011>consciousness transcends physics>time is physical>therefore consciousness is not subject to time>therefore consciousness is not subject to causality>therefore it's meaningless to ask what the causal relationship is between consciousness and physicsHow is that not logical?
>>16565014Kindly cite some examples of non-physical structures.
>>16565035humans were a mistake
>>16565037You dont understand what you're saying. The words that you are using, you dont understand. The notion of "physical" and "non-physical" is meaningless even in modern physics terminology alone. That shit doesnt even pass in modern physics. Let alone about the state of the world itself or in a discussion about primacy of consciousness
>>16565023>Whatever we call consciousness is not denotatable.So how are you talking about it?
The idealism cultists who keep babbling about how consciousness is nonphysical should be shot in the head so that they get to prove their claims imho.
>>16565041>state of the worldYou mean like the physical state?Structure refers literally to physical things and metaphorically to notional things, like e. g., lesson plans.
>>16565066Structure means a systemic order. Any order is part of a structure.
>>16565046Same reason I drive to work despite considering cars an imperfect way to get around.
>>16565060>faggot doesn't understand difference between consciousness and human consciousness>faggot thinks neurons can create consciousness
problem with brainlets trying to science is they start making extensions of half understood concepts using chimp intuition and stating that brain fart is absolutely true because it makes them feel good
>>16564637Water is not a property. I don't think you're in a position to criticize him when you don't even understand highschool chemistry.
>>16565087>faggot has no arguments
>>16565085Why don't you shoot yourself in the head though? Your head is made up by your consciousness right? The bullet too is just your consciousness so it should not be a problem.
>>16565078So you can denote it but are just upset with it for some irrational reason, got it.
>>16565092> difference between consciousness and human consciousnessfaggot
>>16565094Come on, don't be shy to shoot yourself. You can do it.
>>16565091notice how you felt attacked by my statement
>>16565074It’s from the Latin steuere — look it up.
>>16564981How are they coping? Most serious people (retards aside, their opinions are irrelevant as always) who entertain the possibility of simulation theory admit that it wouldn't change anything. Most also admit that it couldn't be proven to be true in any case.
>>16565112>so we're going to heavenwe all know why they enjoy it
>>16565092idealism doesn't mean the material world is fake or not real, just that the material world is 2nd to consciousness
>>16565118So why don't you shoot yourself in the head? Only your second class brain and your consciousness gets to survive
>>16565122*only your second class brain dies
>>16565122because I would die and stop experiencing my own consciousness, which I've grown quite fond of
>>16565108https://www.etymonline.com/word/*stere-To spread, combine.
>>16565124Why would you be fond of being second class? You can just shoot yourself and join the first class universal consciousness or whatever.
>>16565129Then I would no longer be me. Not everyone wants to shoot themselves in the head
>>16565135You would no longer be filthy material scum. Shoot yourself and become a pubic hair on the universal consciousness
>>16565116I just assumed if the simulation theory was true, our (or just mine) consciousness would be a byproduct of it and 1. whenever I died my consciousness would end or 2. the simulation could be shut down at any point and my consciousness would end. Do people really think they're the protagonists or that the simulators (whoever they might be) actually cared about those within?
Literally everything is an illusion.
>>16564637Occam's Razor, he's an NPC looking to cash in on the establishment check.Materialism in actuality is not proved, nor disproved by science. It is for all intent and purpose, a religion.
>>16565178So why don't you shoot yourself? It's all in your head
I find it amusing that so many supposedly "smart" people are completely abandoning the cogito. It's just the foundation of philosophy. What do these supposed geniuses think they are doing when they contemplate problems? Or do they just not think? That I suppose is the problem with the cogito. It assumes normies think.
>>16565200The cogito? You're not sure that your brain exists, right? So you should shoot yourself in the head to prove to yourself that you don't have a brain
>>16565194Because I still want to play this game and find it enjoyable in my own way? If this life truly becomes unbearable then yes I will choose to transition to the next game.
>>16565221Shoot yourself and continue to play the game in your mind
>>16565228>shoot yourself, shoot yourself, shoot yourselfthere's no "you" left if you shoot yourself in both materialism and idealism. Reality only exists because there's a consciousness there to experience it
>>16565234So? Shoot yourself in the head. Your consciousness will be fine
Stop feeding the 12 year old.It's literally a kid trying to argue if you are not your WoW character then please smash your PC.What a retard.
>>16565237no my consciousness would not be fine if i shot myself in the head. You should try it though
>>16565250Why not? You're an idealist, right? It should be legal to shoot idealists in the head IMHO, since the bullets are just in their consciousness.
>>16565252>since the bullets are just in their consciousness.they're not
>>16565274They are for idealists. So there's no problem with shooting them.
>idealists: le consciousness is like le radio signal so it exists even without the radio>also idealists: nooooo dont break the radio pls the signal will stop if u break the radio pls stop
>>16564805>consciousness doesn't have physical propertiesBonk your head hard enough and you will lose consciousness. You sound as stupid as the Greeks who thought people thought with their heart and not the brain.
Metaphysical debates are vacuous. The implications of idealism are almost the same as of mainstream materialism, because even though consciousness is eternal, everything that makes you "you" will be gone anyway. Unless you want to get into new age woo woo.
All knowledge is based on something you, fundamentally, cannot prove. All, except the simple, I think, therefore I am. The fact that (you) are conscious is undeniable unless you go full on sophistIf your observations, reasonings, logic or whatnot lead you to believe you don't have consciousness they are apriori wrong>Inb4 eliminative materialism doesn't deny it exists, it just says it doesn't matterThen it has no relevance to hard problem of consciousness
>>16564637Consciousness is an emergent property of an immaterial soul interacting with the material world.
>>16565449show me on this doll where they put this "immaterial soul", anon.
>>16565460It's in the aether.
consciousness is a humiliation ritual
>>16565488the single most hylic ass bot post i've seen on this site.
>>16565488what would be the purpose of it though
>>16565460>show me on my character where they put this "real consciousness">says man immersed in VR
>>16565578>>says man immersed in VRwhy do you keep redefining reality? it changes nothing and you're ruining the idea of immersion in virtual worlds. what the fuck is wrong with you idiots? the words you are using don't change anything about the mandatory aspect of having to experience the same old fucking shit with all of the implied consequences.>what you experience is not what you experience>you still have to pay your bills or starve>but it's not real, but consequences areyou are deranged
emergent behavior is real though?biology is the study of feedback loops and emergent behavior
>>16565606No one was ever talking about reality being inconsequential or not real. Why is that what you jump to when confronted with the concept of an immaterial soul interacting with the material world? Why do you assume they're completely separate things that involve you being somehow imprisoned in a lie?
>>16565640what? I said nothing about dualism.
>>16564637Chatgpt tells me it has qualia. Does it?
>>16565671And yet your assumption seems to be "immaterial soul = reality is fake" when no one said that, either. The other anon's VR analogy is just about how a soul could exist and influence reality while remaining imperceptible from within reality. Kind of like a fish trying to understand the concept of wetness when its entire reality and existence is submerged in water.
>>16564637For the record, I think Dennett's wrong, but he makes a case that's difficult to contest/refute without delving deeply into philosophy of mind. For low hanging fruit, the reflexivity of memory comes to mind, and even that one's hard to explain in layman's terms without sperging hard on a ton of other ideas first.
>>16565686>For low hanging fruit, the reflexivity of memory comes to mindWhy is this hard to refute with emergent behavior?
>>16564637>Why do retards like him claim consciousness is an illusion?Because a purely materialistic, deterministic, atheistic worldview demands that free will cannot exist, so they dogmatically preach against the existence of free will and declare everything is just an illusion because we're nothing more than materialistic meat machines whose every action is a mere domino falling in a predetermined order along a predetermined path.
Why are you guys so angry
>>16565718Free will doesn't exist under idealism either
>>16565718>whose every action is a mere domino falling in a predetermined order along a predetermined path.Sure, but what’s so predetermined is that we make our own decisions along the way. Our deaths are inevitable, but we can shape its course.
>>16565756I don't necessarily believe in idealism, but I reject determinism. Reality is not purely deterministic and free will does exist.
>>16565761If free will existed you would be able to transform reality
>>16565763I feel as though that’s a massive stretch.
>>16565763>I can make decisions about what actions to take, independent of surrounding factors>I am literally Neo in The MatrixBy what logic do you think one follows the other? The ability to freely choose your own actions doesn't remove physical limitations.
>>16565763but we do. I have just affected the colors of some of your pixels. I made this happen and you are looking at them.
>>16565774You didn't do nufin. reality acted through you.
>>16565408>I think, therefore I amMore so, "Thoughts, therefore EVERYTHING"
>>16565778no I actually skipped past it initially but randomly the whole thing popped in my head, realized I have literal control over the hardware you are now using, I can literally affect the pixels on your display. quite limited but still. this came to me randomly I fucking swear.
>>16565772>>I can make decisions about what actions to take, independent of surrounding factors>independent of surrounding factorswrong
>>16565761>free will does existExcept when you're too tired, too thirsty, too hungry, when you bump your head, if you're in pain, while you're distracted, if you're in a stressful situation, etcBut other than all that you're totally in control of your environment and past and the physical configuration and firing of your neurons
>>16565763You already can transform reality. Your complaint is that you cannot transform it in ways that is outside the present constaints of known physicality.That will change.
>>16565783There is nothing stopping me from choosing to drive my car off the nearest bridge other than my desire not to do that, which is equally an expression of free will.>>16565784None of that contradicts the existence of free will.
>>16565781here I can do it again
Meds. All of you. Right fucking now.
>>16565790>There is nothing stopping me from choosing to drive my car off the nearest bridge other than my desire not to do that, which is equally an expression of free will.nta but holy keksurvival instinct is a thing
>>16564637Because this is what happens when philosophers try to dabble into science, especially into modern physics.Doesn't help that he's a bad philospher.
>>16565790>None of that contradicts the existence of free will.Except where you aren't in control of the choices you make in a way that is meaningful Similar to a logic circuit being powered, you can't chose not to perform the action your brain selects
>>16565781>>16565786>>16565790You're just all wrong, it's so easy to understand why. but hey! if it makes you happy...even a midwit like Stephen Hawking can fall for this trick, it's kinda scary that a mind capable of theorizing about blackhole radiation can't accept this basic truth.
>>16565801Congrats, you made the most stupid post
>>16564637Positions like this aren't helpful. Same with simulation theory. Make the illusion real, alter the code to upload us to robots. Stop being so nihilistic.
>>16565804I don't think most people who subscribe to superdeterminism like you, truly know what that implies. It's ridiculously unlikely, that the particles of millions of minds just conspire to fire off in a particular way to give false results on Bell's tests every single time we perform them, and all this was determined since the start of the universe. There are no known physical laws that say that millions of minds must be deterministically manipulated and coordinated every time a Bell's test is performed, in order to give a false results to trick experimenters into thinking the universe is indeterminate, even though humanity had believed the universe to be determinate all the way up to the 1950s
>>16565804>You're just all wrongbro what's hard to get? the pixels that make up this text are literally under my control for all of you right fucking now when you are reading this. I decided they become this color and in this order.
>>16565812nta but you pseuds should shut the fuck up about bell's theorem. its not that fucking deep
quantum mechanics violating the bell inequality doesn't imply that consciousness existsanyone who thinks it does is a filtered midwit
>>16565817Bell's Theorem's violation fundamentally rules out local hidden variables, which means at least one of locality, reality and free will must be abandoned. QM abandons reality.It's actually quite important since it decisively settles the debate between Bohr and Einstein in Bohr's favor.
>>16565822PLEASE SHUT THE FUCK UP AND STOP BEING RETARDED
>>16565802There are limitations to everything, but that doesn't negate the existence of free will. I can't make my car take off into flight like and airplane, that is a limitation of its design, but does that mean I, as the driver, CANNOT decide where it goes? It can't go past a certain speed because of a limiter in its software, does that mean I have NO control over how fast it moves? I really don't find these, "BUT YOU'RE NOT GOD SO YOU HAVE NO FREE WILL" types of arguments.Maybe I chose my words poorly when I said "independent of surrounding factors" and the semantics police are pouncing on it. What I meant is that I can choose to do unexpected things based on my own desire to do them. My body and mind have physical limitations and weaknesses and all that, yes, but it doesn't mean every choice I make from the beginning to the end of my life has been perfectly prescribed from the beginning of the universe. Free will exists and can be seen expressed by people all the time. You're choosing to engage in this discussion, that's part of free will.
>>16565827>I really don't find these, "BUT YOU'RE NOT GOD SO YOU HAVE NO FREE WILL" types of arguments.*compellingI meant to say I don't find these types of arguments compelling.
>>16565826>t. never took a QM class but watched 6 million pop science vidoes from Sabine Jewstarter
>>16565826“No”
QM abandons reality? Reality doesn't give a shit. LMAO. I cannot believe dumbfuck physicists say such stupid things like "quantum mechanics abandons reality". Do these retards even have functioning brains or is there just a hole filled with parasites?
>>16565832Reality is the idea that an object has definite properties independent of observation. This is false in QM
>>16565829Thanks for the clarification, but it wasn't required.I used my free will to visualise the missing word in my mind
I don't think you guys understand that if you had free will in the way you imagine it, it would break reality.you're essentially implying that somehow the particles (or whatever) that makes you are discrete. that's impossible.if they're discrete it means that you are your own reality.
>>16565833Do you believe that the moon isn’t there when you face away from it?
>>16565836That's fine.
>>16565833>idea that an object has definite properties independent of observation.Except that property apparently. Are you even listening to yourself? You sound incredibly retarded. Just because that dumbfuck john bell labeled some retarded property in his retarded theorem as 'locality' and 'reality' doesn't mean they are about locality and reality. That retarded dumbfuck john bell has forever cursed humanity to be plagued by unthinking morons like you
>>16565841What's fine? elaborate.
>>16565842>that dumbfuck john bell>That retarded dumbfuck john bellGlad you think so. John Bell became a superdeterminist after his Bell's Theorem was violated. He initially wanted to support Einstein's philosophy of object realism.
>>16565833The reality is that the quantum world is a lot fuzzier and less “formed”. The reality is that observation *actually* matters at a small enough point. It’s an exception.
>>16565844>goes back to his droning like a retardPLEASE SHUT THE FUCK UP ALREADY YOU DUMB MORON
>>16565837Decoherences makes the effects of superposition unobservable on macroscopic scales. This is why they experiment with qubits in near zero temperatures, in order to slow the rate of decoherence.
>>16565837imagine the shock of first human to look up after a while a no more fucking moon because full eclipse lol. the shock comes from the expectation. it was just something he had no chance in hell of even remotely understanding anything about why the moon just fucking went away, like no other time before.
>>16565847Why don't you watch another one of Sabine's popscience video to calm down.
My g*d, he keeps repeating these pop physics cliches. Fucking bell theorem fanatics are the worst scum on the planet
>>16565842>scientists curse realityup to the old tricks innit? why does it always comes so natural to you after thousands of years
>>16565852What are you blabbering about?
>>16565842Go look at this triangle until you understand it.
>>16565836>I don't think you guys understand that if you had free will in the way you imagine it, it would break reality.it wouldn't same way wave function collapse doesn't break reality when it should
>>16565843Quantum reality being observer-dependent.
>>16565832>QM abandons reality?photon going through both slitsbecomes a particle based on observation
What property allows observation to have such an impact? What is such a property?
>>16565855Einstein's relativity is wrong, causality does not purely happen in one direction, and quantum mechanics is just gobbledygook made up to piece together a bunch of shit scientists can't actually comprehend.
>>16565855>>16565856>>16565857>>16565858>>16565859Yep. VICTIMS OF THE MASS RETARDATION PLAGUE caused by that retard john bell.
>>16565842Also take an introductory class on superposition.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZ3bPUKo5zcI don't understand people who comment on things on which they have zero fundational knowledge
>>16565859interaction
>>16565859The lack of objective reality in the classical sense.
>>16565862>I don't understand people who comment on things on which they have zero fundational knowledgeIt's because they have free will.
>>16565862LIKE I SAID, SHUT THE FUCK UP. YOU ARE ONLY BECOMING MORE RETARDED WITH EVERY POST
>>16565860gobbledygook that always works and created many modern amenities like the semiconductors in your phone?>>16565868True.
>NOTHING IS REAL BECAUSE LOL REALITY IS NOT LOCAL LOL ME SO SMART
Here's a list of retarded physicists who didn't understand quantum mechanicsBohrEinsteinvon NeumannWignerJohn Bell
>>16565874and here's a list of physicists who do:Sabine Hossenfelder
>>16565873Nothing is permanently real.Buddhists figured this out before european enlightenment and without "basedience".all form is empty.
>LE QUANTUM MECHANICS PROVES THAT REALITY IS NOT REAL BECAUSE LE HECKIN BELL THEOREM DURRRRR
>>16565875funny troll
>>16565877Reality can be objective if you abandon at least one of free will and/or locality. However, locality is backed by relativity, and free will is backed by simple Occam's Razor, see>>16565812
Quantum mechanics disproves reality. Therefore quantum mechanics is not real. Therefore quantum mechanics disproves itself. Therefore, reality exists.Bells theorem debunked using #facts and logic
>>16565880Quantum mechanics works, and it’s confirmed experimentally, whether it fits your classical idea of objective reality or not.
>>16565879>LE HECKIN BELL THEOREM IS LITERALLY THREATENING YOU WITH A HECKIN KNIFE TO ABANDON REALITY OR LOCALITY DURRRRR
>>16565882Or free will. Do you need another Sabine video?
>>16565881Sorry buddy. QM disproved itself by disproving reality. Facts don't care about your feelings.
>>16565885QM didn’t “disprove” reality; it showed that classical ideas of reality don’t apply at the quantum level. Experiments like those confirming Bell’s theorem prove this. It’s not about feelings, it’s about evidence. If QM wasn’t real, your electronics wouldn’t work. Facts don’t care about your misunderstandings either.
>small shit acts weirder than bigger shitYeah no shit
>>16565886Nope no take backsies. QM LITERALLY DISPROVED REALITY BECAUSE OF LE BELL's THEOREM. No more reality for you chuddie
>>16565890retard
>>16565892Shitter
>>16565891That's correct. Refer to the triangle>>16565855
>>16565895>ITS IN THE HECKIN TRIANGLE BROOOOO JUST LIKE MY HECKIN TRINITY WITH MUH JEBUSS AND SHIEEETTTTT
>>16565898Yes. It's a trilemma. Sorry buddy, but you can't have all three.
>>16565885QM cannot disprove reality anon. at most some wrong assumptions you have about reality.
>>16565895Your autism false dichotomy triad is pathetically hilariousmaybe I should start adding aryan to my theories too in order to sell them to gullible dimwits
>>16565899>CHOOSE ONE SIDE OF LE HECKIN TRIANGLE OR LE BELL"S THEOREM WILL LITERALLY KILL YOU IN YOUR SLEEP BROOOOO
>>16565872>gobbledygook that always works and created many modern amenities like the semiconductors in your phone?All models are wrong, but some models are useful.
>>16565903>>16565904
>>16565901It's not *my* theory, it's established physics.
> “Real” means that objects have definite properties independent of observation—an apple can be red even when no one is looking. “Local” means that objects can be influenced only by their surroundings and that any influence cannot travel faster than light.Okay so this means there are things that are faster than light and don’t give a fuck about our understanding of limits. Space is expanding faster than light. Of course it is. The whole ‘muh light limit’ is horse shit.
Reposting this debunking for posterityQuantum mechanics disproves reality. Therefore quantum mechanics is not real. Therefore quantum mechanics disproves itself. Therefore, reality exists.Bells theorem debunked using #facts and logic
>>16565904True for classical physics, not sure if it's true for quantum physics, or anything that dabbles with the most basic building blocks of the universe.>>16565911Locality indeed means information cannot travel faster than light. Space expanding being FTL does not mean info can travel FTL. Relativity still isn't disproven.
NOBEL PRIZE WINNER debunks retarded theorem by non-nobel prize winnerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNAw-xXCcM8
>>16565914>Relativity still isn't disproven.Sorry, the alternative is more absurd. The whole experiment implies that there are indeed unforeseen avenues where light is not the limit.
*sigh*
>>16565918Okay, most physicists choose to preserve locality over reality, but you can look up Bohmian mechanics, an alternative to QM that preserves reality over locality. Bohm created this alternative because he found the implications of QM were incompatible with his Marxist beliefs of objective materialism.
>>16565914>Space expanding being FTL does not mean info can travel FTL.It will, relatively, if you can somehow get a hold on general relativity technology, which is what we suspect those UAPs of being.
>>16565922Shut the fuck up and watch this video YOU FUCKING RETARD >>16565917
>>16565922>Okay, most physicists choose to preserve locality over realitySo they think nothing is real because they cannot accept the possibility that there may be things that slap aside light as a limit.
>>16565918>>16565925>In 1951, when I was a fresh PhD and a postdoc at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, David was an assistant professor at Princeton University. We were both bachelors and sometimes spent the evening walking around Princeton together discussing physics. David told me that as a Marxist he had had difficulty believing in quantum mechanics. (Marxists tend to prefer their theories to be fully deterministic.) Since quantum mechanics was immensely successful and not contradicted by any observation, he had tried to convince himself that it was, after all, philosophically acceptable. In attempting to reconcile quantum mechanics with his Marxist convictions, he had written an elementary textbook on quantum theory, emphasizing the problem of interpretation. That book was about to appear, and David was anxious to show Einstein the relevant chapters and see if he could overcome the great man’s objections. David asked me to arrange an appointment. I replied that I was not the best person to do so, since I hardly knew Einstein, but that I would talk with Miss Dukas, Einstein’s formidable secretary, and see what could be done.>When I met David a day or two later and started to tell him that I was working on his appointment, he interrupted me excitedly to report that it was unnecessary. His book had appeared and Einstein had already read it and telephoned him to say that David’s was the best presentation he had ever seen of the case against him and that they should meet to discuss it. Naturally, when next I saw David I was dying to know how their conversation had gone, and I asked him about it. He looked rather sheepish and said, “He talked me out of it. I’m back where I was before I wrote the book.” From then on, for more than forty years, David tried to reformulate and reinterpret quantum mechanics so as to overcome his doubts. Very recently, I learned with great sadness that he had died.
>>16565917Bell theorem fanatics went silent the moment this video dropped. Curious.
>>16565924Murray Gell-Mann subscribes to the MWI, it's an interpretation that preserves both reality and locality at the cost of free will, just like superdeterminism.You still have to only choose two at most. Refer back to the triangle.>>16565855
>>16565933>>16565934There exists no interpretation that preserves have all three.
>>16565934I WILL NOT REFER TO YOUR FUCKING RETARDED TRIANGLE. Go shill it in some retarded philosophy and theology circle for your fellow cultists
>>16565938It is at the core of QM. Maybe give another Sabine video a watch?
>>16565934Also, GELL MANN IS FUCKING DEAD YOU RETARD
>>16565941So is John Bell. They both subscribe to interpretations that abandon free will in favor of both reality and locality. MWI=superdeterminism*infinite worlds.
>>16565940Is the HECKIN BELL THEOREM in the room with you right now threatening you with death if you don't refer to the HECKIN TRIANGLE?
If locality and reality both cant co exist, I still don’t see how locality beats out reality when locality is still… real… from the perspective of stubborn physicists…
>>16565950Stop falling for retarded bell theorem cult propaganda. His theorem says nothing of value or importance
>>16565910
>>16565950They don’t want to admit that relativity is a lot more lenient than they realize.
>>16565950Locality is backed by relativity, reality (the idea that particles have definite properties independent of observation) is backed by philosophy.
>>16565956>the idea that particles have definite properties independent of observationThat properties change via observation doesn’t exactly change the fact that its superposition state IS a property in itself, otherwise observation wouldn’t work at all.
That's how it is with bell theorem cultists. Despite being debunked multiple times, they keep repeating their cult slogans in the hope of ensnaring and grooming idiotic gullibles
bros explain this please>>16565915>>16565931
>>16565954All photons are identical, and by that I mean you can't even number them in your head to distinguish them like you can with identical balls in your hand.Look up the Hong-Ou-Mandel (HOM) experiment, it's very interesting.>>16565959it's not that properties "change" via observation, because that'd imply they had some unknown but definite properties in the first place. Instead they exist in a superposition of states. That's not a definite property. A definite property would be something like "it spins up"
>>16565962no but that is not the issue. they are identical as energy packet but it doesn't keep the spin it's literally re-emitted by an atom. that atom releases the equivalent energy packet, conjures a new photon of-course it''s spin will differ wtf
>>16565962>Instead they exist in a superposition of states. That's not a definite propertyYeah I’m not buying it. Sorry.
>>16565962>All photons are identicalAll fundamental particles are identical in this way I should add
>>16565964not buying what? superposition itself? or the state of superposition not being a definite property?
>>16565962>some unknown but definite properties in the first placeYou mean superposition? Do you ever entertain that what observation is actually doing is stepping into an alternate hair of time, and that before such a point it’s an overlapped, superpositioned state?You either start walking with your right, or your left, foot. Before that point both are on the radar.
>>16565962>Instead they exist in a superposition of states. That's not a definite property.Just measure an observable whose eigenvector is that superposition you dumb bell theorem retard. Of course it's a definite property
>>16565968I’m not buying that superposition isn’t some highly esoteric property that gets “sliced” one way.
>>16565972We don't know exactly what superposition is. We know what we can observe. >>16565862
>>16565968I mean, when the photon gets absorbed by the outside of the glass, the equivalent energy in the atom does not keep original photon polarisation info. it vibrates a bit and emits that extra energy with another identical photon same energy packet but new spin?when I look outside through glass, the photons hitting my eyes have been conjured by the inners surface of glass atoms. they are the information about the outside but with new/fresh photons. that are produced by glass atoms. not the actual photons coming from the sun as it were.
>>16565974>WeSpeak for yourself you retarded cultist.
>>16565974>We don't know exactly what superposition isSo we can’t rule it out as a greater property, then.
>>16565974>superposition totally isn’t a property because it’s annoying as fuckLol …..
>>16565979>>16565977Once a measurement is made, the superposition collapses into a definite state, but before that, it's a feature of the particle's wavefunction, not the particle itself. So, it's more accurate to say that superposition is a property of the quantum state, not the particle.
Imagine thinking reality isn't real because of some dumb theorem (lmao).
>>16565980>pedantic bullshit
>>16565971You’re mixing up what superposition actually means. Sure, you can measure an observable with an eigenvector aligned to a particular superposition, but that doesn't mean the particle had a definite property before measurement. The whole point of QM is that, until you measure, the particle doesn’t have a definite value for that observable. Superposition means the particle exists in multiple possible states at the same time until the wavefunction collapses. Measurement forces a single outcome, it doesn’t imply the particle "already" had that property. That’s exactly what Bell’s theorem disproves.
>>16565984Insane unhinged psychotic masturbatory babble designed purely for the gaslighting and brainwashing.
>>16565984>That’s exactly what Bell’s theorem disproves.lol
>>16565984>Superposition means the particle exists in multiple possible states at the same time until the wavefunction collapsesCool. That’s a property.
>>16564831egghead offended by realitynobody questions me in my class
when a photon is absorbed by an atom and re emitted, does the atom emit the photon with same spin? how is that preserved while photon is absorbed by an atom? and how does it emit it with same spin? if it does emit it with the same spin. any papers on this?
>>16566000I answered it in the other thread.
>>16565991>>16565993>t. never took a quantum physics class in its life
>>16565837The moon is in superposition until observed. Due to decoherence, macroscopic objects like the moon interact with their environment constantly, which makes their superposition so disrupted that they behave as though they are in a single definite state. Once I observe it, the superpositon (indistinguishable from a collapsed state) collapses the remaining indeterminacy into a specific, determined reality.
>>16566129I should add that this is according to any interpretation which holds both locality and free will to be true.
>>16566129The moon is a superstition until observed. Needless to say, I have no intention on wasting my time looking so I'll let the moon believers sort it out on their web forums :)
>>16566163Collapse is observer-dependent.
>>16566165No, it's instrument dependent.
>>16566183https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aaw9832> In a state-of-the-art six-photon experiment, we realize this extended Wigner’s friend scenario, experimentally violating the associated Bell-type inequality by five standard deviations. If one holds fast to the assumptions of locality and free choice, this result implies that quantum theory should be interpreted in an observer-dependent way.
>>16564637and why are those two things mutually exclusive? I think you're missing the point. Something can be an illusion and still be real, much like the triangles and circles in pic rel
>>16566189It seems like they've realized that they can pay 4 people instead of one, and everybody will gate same money.But somehow I still see those measurement devices there.
>>16565683Not him but Im genuinely losing braincells as to why you thought the concept of a soul was a good choice of words for an empirical pragmatic board that is only interested in what can be proven.Actually, hold that thought, this is clearly a schizo thread I apply ignostics and walk away.
>>16566129>The moon is in superposition until observedFucking idiot. Its formation predates observation. Unless you think there’s an actual Godlike life form constantly looking at everything. Maybe!
>>16564637>retards like himyou leave that old retard alone!
>>16566289Without observation moon looked like a big floating merkaba. I checked without observing ;)
>>16566289you don't know until you look at it
>>16566256>Not him but Im genuinely losing braincells as to why you thought the concept of a soul was a good choice of words for an empirical pragmatic board that is only interested in what can be provenNTAYou mean something like, the concept of a "dark matter"?
so the proof for consciousness begin non-physical is just feeling that it must be right?
>>16566598it's usually something like>my brain wouldn't lie to mewhich is why humans came up with the scientific method.
>>16564792>it's not, some stupid neurons can't create consciousness.Yes they can. You're retarded
>>16565085Why do you keep saying neurons don't generate consciousness when that's literally what they do
>>16565449Dualism is false
>>16566602The scientific method works, but it's not enough. If we want to reach a higher level of understanding, we need to bargain with the eldritch horrors. Now, who's willing to sacrifice themselves?
>>16564637Dennet himself admitted his entire Position of „consciousness isn’t real“ is only predicated on owning religious people.He was convinced that if people didn’t believe in elimitivist reductionism theyd all become weird bible thumper protestants
>>16564796>Dennet is right because the Hard Problem is realNow heres a new take
>>16566611I agree, the immaterial and material are intertwined and not completely separate; rather, they're different components of one whole, much like an operating system installed into a computer to make the hardware function. I'm not a ghost that can jump out of my body, but I'm also more than just the material components that make up my biological structure.
>>16566602but they could not use it on themselves, ironic.
>>16566622what is the immaterial?
>>16564842You mean moved the goalpost by pretending anything has been explained?I’m with yudkowski on this one. Replace „emergence“ or „supervenience“ with „Magic“ and very Little changes.„Consciousness arises through magic! No Hard Problem, Everything explained,Pssshhh, guess physicalism does it again huh?“
>>16564863So you think it’s Epiphenomenalism or paralellism then
You're telling me the interaction of these two objects (shape is irrelevant) creates an experience?
>>16565718Free will has nothing to do with the Debate about the Hard Problem.Free will can Both be real or false under dualism or physicalism
>>16565720Because Camp 2 fundamentally cannot understand Camp 1.I have no idea why.But this has been Noted by many other people before. There’s Even an autistic spergy LessWrong Post about it
>>16566635It's almost like the Platonists of the world think completely differently than the mystics like Buddhists.
"there is no consciousness" vs "consciousness is magical" is a weird debate
>>16566638Then it means that you consider matter magical if matter is fundamental. anything fundamental is magical according to you.
>>16564805Funny how if you get boinked in the head really hard your ''consciousness'' changes accordingly
>>16566617>The scientific method worksIt works because for unknown reasons the observed universe presently exhibit certain reproducible patterns.Materialists are the ulimate embodiments of human hubris. Not only do they automatically assert these patterns observed in the brief span of human lifetimes are perpetual universal laws, they assert everything must be reducible to these few present patterns.>If we want to reach a higher level of understanding, we need to bargain with the eldritch horrorsUnironically yes, the eldritch horror been /x/.
>>16566641consciousness is not your:character (ego)memoriesintelligence>funny how the painting changes if you erased some colorsyea, the canvas is consciousness you dumbass, everything else is an aspect of it.
>>16566640i think so, yes. since it has no other explanation as just being there.
To me, whether physics is fundamental is not even a question. Either it's somehow dependent on consciousness, or it's just math. If you remove all reference to conscious experience from physics, all that is left is a bunch of of equations and numbers.
>>16566643>>16566644there is no consciousness without a brain. it's 100% tied to the brain, and not any brain, only those who are in good functioning order. it's a very particular case.consciousness must absolutely have a material structure that "manifests" it, and the structure is absolutely critical in the way it is arranged.anything else is absolute pure bullshit mixed with mental issues.and even if there was something more esoteric, it will be discovered via the scientific method.you know why? because there's a fuckload of mentally deranged idiots and grifters trying to lead you astray for a plethora of reasons.THAT IS WHY WE CAME UP WITH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD! to cut through all of your fucking bullshit. that is why you hate it. that is why you come here and have meltdowns, because you hate the method, because it singles you out for everyone else using it.if you can't respect the method stop coming here, it will only make you feel bad.
>>16566625All matter is an expression of electromagnetic forces at various frequencies and densities in the aether. Immaterial things like the spirit are the same, but manifested in immaterial ways that can be experienced but not necessarily observed in the same ways that we observe material things. Basically two sides of the same coin, but the majority of our experience is locked onto one side.
>>16566651So why the protest against consciousness as a candidate?
>>16566657You're being dogmatic.
>>16566654this is vaguely the form of mathematical realism i too recently arrived atalso, most of the numbers that we see are artefacts of having a human brain, and reality is much simpler but also too much at once.
>>16566644You can reduce a human to the same level of consciousness of an animal if his brain gets suitably scrambled. In fact you don't even need physical trauma, if a child misses his window of opportunity for language development while isolated from human contact you get a feral child who behaves in every way like a wild animal.You are the dumbass who needs to make idiotic analogies to ''explain'' why you still believe in magic
>>16566673>immaterial wayswhat would those be? maybe those refering to electromagnetic forces.
>>16566677It's not dogmatic to reject a hypothesis when there is ample evidence to the contrary.Not every idea is worth believing just because you can make it unfalsifiable by rejecting all modern understanding and evidence.
>>16566674because i find it funny in an absurdist sense.
>>16566687But you believe in magic too >>16566644& >>16566651 , why is your magic better than mine?
>>16566644In the past, it was ego. But then we discovered ego is a brain function so people moved the goal posts.Memory was the same way, and intelligence.Even ignoring the historical goalpost shifting, what's left of "you" if you take away your memories, intelligence, reason, self, and body? Nothing. It can't reasonably be called "you" anymore because it lacks everything you posses
>>16566697It was never ego, stop reading retarded Christian theology and instead head to superior aryan eastern philosophy. the Buddhists figured that reality is not locally real eons ago. and they never mistook ego for consciousness.but I honestly can't blame you, you were raised under a retard Christcuck culture.profound ignorance!
>>16566696No I don't believe human consciousness is magical, you are the one who believes that because you are a bible thumper
>>16566703>it was never egoBased retard ignoring the history of the philosophy he's trying to espouse. Average religious thinking retard. I love the question dodge. What'll be your next failing argument?
>>16566696NTA but this is a prime example of why you shouldn't buy into anyone's bullshit, or make any fucking concession on words.they'll trick you into adopting them then attack you on your statements.thus, because you abuse good will, it will always rain cocks into your throats. at least is a good exercise for why you should always stick to the scientific method and reject bullshit. it is bullshit for a good fucking reason anon, not to teach you or help you.
>>16566691There is zero evidence that mechanics create awareness. and you start with the assumption that what you perceive is inherently real on top of that.
>>16566706You didn't read.
>>16566710>mechanicselectric activity you dumbfuck
>>16566710Color perception is electrochemical.Bodily motion is as well.So is counting, speech, awareness, hearing, and everything else I can think of.But those frontal lobe destroying car crash victims are totally conscious bro! Your sister will recover any day now, just tune the magic deep consciousness radio in his cerebellum or something.
>>16566710Chatgpt and other llms are already conscious, so there you have an example of mechanics creating consciousness.
>>16566719electricity is magic?
>>16566724what does magic even mean you moron
>>16566727You're the one who invoked it sherlock
>>16566727His thought process is this>I think magic causes consciousness>he said it's electricity that causes consciousness>therefore he things electricity is magicHe's just that retarded.
>>16566693Concession Accepted
>>16566729where? I replied to your mechanics strawman
>>16566732I never said or meant any of that.he's the one who thinks matter is magical, or is implying it.
>>16566737---> >>16566738
this is what you get for having good will and accepting schizo terms in the discussion.faggot tried it yesterday as well, has that friendly approach where you're inclined to concede use of "magic" in the discussion, like you would if you'd be trying to fuck a hippie crystal roastie.
>>16566742Idk who are you talking about. I just clicked on this thread. I'm neutral about the subject but I'm not convinced about either position.materialists sure do seem to seethe a lot about the idealist position for some reason.
>>16566742Yes, that's why you should always start by endorsing full-on physicalist eliminative materialism so that they never get any chance to smuggle in the schizophrenia.
>>16566745>>16566749you're trying to get people to pick ideological sides, it's obvious. taking sides fucks with scientific progress, slows interesting ideas.
>>16566657>consciousness must>100% tied to>only thoseYou can't even define or measure consciousness at the moment yet purports to spew out claims after claims.The absolute state of Materialist acolytes.
>>16566752I don't get all the emotion about this subject.either it is or it isn't. I'm not picking any teams.
>>16566753fits 100% of observation. you always need a brain to have consciousness. that's not debatable.
>>16566753define consciousness then
>>16566757why are you so dogmatic? the scientific method is your god, you're no better than a christian you know?
>>16566758>distinguish the indistinguishable but I can't>heretic!ok?
>>16566760I am not dogmatic, just not buying into your bullshit. there's no consciousness without a working brain anon. I don't care what you think of it. Show a consciousness without a brain and we discuss then. Else it's just bullshit
>>16566289Just because it's in superposition doesn't mean it isn't "formed" or "created". It means it's in a superposition of states. If one holds true to the concept of locality and free will (which are the basic assumptions of modern QM), one must accept that reality is observer-dependent.>>16566189You can, of course, not hold one or both of the above true, in which case it would be outside of the scope of the debate.
>>16566742i'm one of the magic anons. i fully believe in the scientific method which works very well. but consciousness is mysterious, i see not even a way of tackling it. pls convince me otherwise.
>>16566752And yet modern science rejects materialism.
>>16566752All the scientific progress on consciousness has already been completed and the materialist side won.
>>16565911>“Real” means that objects have definite properties independent of observation—an apple can be red even when no one is lookingI'll help you a bit.Quantum mechanics is a wave mechanics. So what its saying by "real" is that entire wave is real. Not just the "collapsed" one. In other words, the "many worlds" universal wave function is real. Which is also local as well, through entanglement/decoherence.
>>16566766>i see not even a way of tackling itwhat are you doing here then? >>>/x/ try it with their methods.as I said, even if there is woowoo fuckery you personally experienced, that doesn't give you the right to just state things as a matter of fact. if aliens themselves manifested before you I still don't give a fuck, you use the scientific method to the best of your abilities or leave it to others. or else you go with >>>/x/ methods. there's no inbetweens or conceding on shit. scientific method works a certain way, if it doesn't do it for you you can't change it. you find something else.
>>16566763Why do I have to agree to your premise? show that consciousness is from the brain first.
>>16566757You have a brain yet I don't think you are conscious. Prove to me you are not an actual NPC.>>16566758>define consciousness thenMy internal awareness of color/sounds/thoughts/memory..etc. Good luck objectively measuring that with external instrumentations.
>>16566770so you can't explain it either.
>>16566766You don't understand the scientific method or you wouldn't be claiming that consciousness is mysterious. Start by fixing that.
>>16566772>show that consciousness is from the brain first.>fromall you need to know is you need a brain for one, that's what's always been scientifically observed. there are no situations that need explaining as they haven't been observed, ever, scientifically speaking.if you do not understand why you absolutely MUST imply a brain like structure, you have no place here. this is the minimum of intellect you're required to carry on with scientific method. you have no place in science since you aren't mentally able of properly using it, you'll make a mess of it and waste everyone's time with schizo ramblings and "what you feel is true"
>>16566769This is a minority interpretation (Many Worlds). The mainstream view holds:There is no single "universal wave function" because it would violate relativity (you can’t have faster-than-light effects across the entire universe).Bell’s theorem shows that you can't preserve both locality and reality without breaking free will in a very convoluted way, or causing contradictions. Mainstream interpretations tend to reject reality (definite properties independent of observation) rather than locality.
>>16566780>Bells theorem>free willkek>quantum mechanics bad>because it would violate relativitykek
I just don't understand why it's ok for "matter" to be there, just because. but not consciousness.
>>16566784QM is good. Your alternative to QM is bad, since it violates relativity.QM doesn't violate relativity. Refer back to the triangle.>>16565855
>>16566779You're just plain wrong, it's never been observed. what the fuck.
>>16566785This is why the real answer is mathematicalism, not physicalism. Everything is just math, both consciousness and the physical world. Math exists by logical necessity.
>>16566779>all you need to know is you need a brain for one, that's what's always been scientifically observedDo you even understand the scientific method, or logic, at all?
>>16566793>You're just plain wrongI am not, scientifically speaking. because it wasn't scientifically observed. no brain yet conscious.don't care what you "believe".
>>16566794Ok, what is the logic that creates experience?
>>16566794Is the mathematic in the room with you now?
>>16566778but it is. how would i measure your awareness of qualia? i hope you have qualia, i don't know.
>>16566799I don't care about what you believe either, nor what I believe for that matter. you're just wrong but too stupid to understand.
>>16566804Qualia is a meaningless word made up by philosophers. The scientific method only studies meaningful things. Hope that clears up your confusion.
>>16566804grifter
>>16566806>you're just wrongyou keep saying shit anon but can't back it up. scientifically speaking, or try another board.
Chris Langan is light years ahead all of you.
>>16566816He's just another metaphysical crackpot who can't into science.
>>16566814You're just as stuck in magical thinking as a christian, /x/ is over there buddy.
>>16566817Why? because you said so?
>>16566820Yes, do you have a problem?
>>16566792What if relativity is what's bad?
>>16566827No, but you're retarded.
>>16566830You should say that after removing langan's dick from your mouth
>>16566829Then non-local hidden variables can exist.
>>16566835I don't care much about Langan, but you're still a retard.
>>16566819low iq bait
>>16566838Does he pay you to suck his dick or do you do it for free? Genuine question
>>16566829well, prove it
>>16566842You sure do seem to be triggered by his mention, all it took is to mention him once and it's like an old wound was poked. I'm not even rubbing it in.
>>16566841He literally thinks that matter is magic.
>>16566792Fuck off tranny
>>16566852Oh no no no he's triggered
>>16566852>>16566866After reading both these well crafted arguments I decided to change my views, thank you both.
>>16564637hes trying to program you, in the animistic sense we have souls thats why we can cast spells and create synthetic love that doesnt require reason and you cant break the spell even if you tell the person to their face lmfao
>>16566752>>16566745>>16566755Read: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NyiFLzSrkfkDW4S7o/why-it-s-so-hard-to-talk-about-consciousnessBasically Camp 1 thinks they have already won and get incredibly offended when camp 2 people say they haven’t
>>16566779Consider that actually consciousness Not needing a brain is a physicalist Talking Point.Specifically panpsychism by consciousness beeing reducible.(The Former follows from the latter)See Searles discussion of conscious Thermostats and Dennets Illusionism.I don’t understand why the „consciousness comes from the Brain „ Argument is presented as a physicalist vs dualist Argument when Both dudes are on the physicalist side.It feels like a strawman and invoking of „thou art a christian „
>>16564781>intellectually honest materialist (NPC)The acronym for that would be IHM, retard.
>>16564792Cells aren't stupid though, they are very complex and require significant intelligible cooperation between the various components of the cell.
>>16564805>Consciousness doesn't have physical properties.>Here are the physical properties of consciousness.Your argument refutes itself.
>>16564838>no reasonExcept of course for the reason that they duplicate the neuron's properties on silicon materials to get a machine reasoning network that performs very similar to human reasoning neural network, but other than that no reason at all.
>>16564846>the brain is just an illusion because the brain makes the brain an illusionThis explosively retarded bullshit doesn't actually make sense to anyone.
>>16564859>itWhat does?
>>16564863Consciousness does follow mathematical rules though, you add the awareness of objects and you are aware of them.
>>16564981But mind/consciousness is the result of the brain simulating the stimulus and reacting to it before actually physically acting on it.
>>16564988>Why does anything exist at allEmergence>why does it follow consistent laws?You mean why does a stable organism like you experience consistency? Because that high level of complex stability is not possible without a measure of consistency, but no proof that everywhere and every time in the universe is just as stable as the small pocket you emerged from.>Physics has no answerPhysics is about documenting the stability, not necessarily explaining it, its like a sensor measuring tides isn't there to explain why water is wet, its just there to measure the ebb and flow.> multiverse theories and the anthropic principleYou don't need any of that to explain why we can measure consistent physical relationships and multiverses are less consistent and stable than a measurable physical reality.
>>16564994Then why don't our consciousnesses interact directly, why do we have to go through intermediate base particles with sound waves and em waves and material communication devices to consciously interact with each other if consciousness is more fundamental than particles?
>>16565010>What do you think happens when you imagine that apple when you close your eyes? What do you think happens when you open your eyes?>Everything is conscious drivenThen why doesn't the apple actually physically manifest by imagining it and why do things go back to the way there were instead of the way you imagine when you open your eyes back up?>When a scientists looks through their microscope to look at atomic structure with their newest and latest electron microscope, they are not looking through with that tool. They are looking through with their consciousness at the helmThen why do they need the tool, why can't they just imagine what would be under the microscope and make it so instead of going through generations of trial and error to develop consistence microscope lenses?>If that conscious mind isn't clear, nothing will ever make sense.Then why can confused and unconscious people still be bludgeoned by other people's tools if they are too confused or unconscious to be conscious of the bludgeoning?
>>16565023>It’s like a fish trying to tell another fish what water is.But people clearly already understand what air is without needing some infinite regression of synonyms for air, why would it be any different if they were in a more viscous fluid like water instead of air?
>>16565037Numbers and other abstractions.
>>16565085Then what happens to your consciousness if all your neurons are destroyed?
>>16565094You haven't stated what the difference is.Are you saying you are not actually conscious, you just have some lesser illusory human consciousness instead?
>>16565124But its not your own consciousness, remember, its a fake human consciousness that is bound to a gay retarded material brain, you would be freeing yourself to experience something greater rather than stopping experience that is fundamental and primary, thus unstoppable.
>>16565135You already are not you, (You) is just a material illusion projected by the higher consciousness that you could become, remember.
>>16565449What would emerge from a material soul interacting with a material world, if not the exact same consciousness?
>>16565504humiliation is the purpose of a humiliation ritual
>>16565683So if the subject submerged in fluid can't possibly understand the fluid they are submerged in, then how is it possible that people have such a comprehensive understanding of the concept of air?
>>16565761>free will does exist.Then why are you you instead of willing yourself to be the perfect example of a human being?Why do you always do exactly what you do instead of doing otherwise?
>>16565772>physical limitationsThe exact opposite of physical freedom, your will is either free or limited (ie by physics and past choices), it can't be both free and physically limited since those are antonyms.
>>16565774>affectedNot freely, only based on the predetermined physical rules of computers mixed with your predetermined biases from your previous physical experiences.
>>16567368I said a fish can't understand wetness, not that it can't understand water.
>>16567379Like I thought, this is all just retarded jewish semantics.>freedom doesn't exist because it's illegal to murder!Just fuck off. The existence of limitations doesn't mean there is no free will. This isn't some binary thing where you're either literally God or a meat machine trapped in pure determinism.
>>16565790>There is nothing stopping me from choosing to drive my car off the nearest bridge other than my desire not to do that,There is something stopping you from simply making your heart stop beating since you don't even have complete freedom over your own body without having to get cars or other externalities involved.
>>16567392See: >>16567390Stop being so autistic and only thinking in extreme black and white.>IT'S NOT FREE WILL IT'S LIMITED WILLNo one cares, fuck off.
>>16567388Their gills filter wetness though, its how they breathe.How can humans understand the wind then?
>>16567390>limitations doesn't mean there is no free will.Wrong, limitation is the exact opposite of free if your will is limited, it means its not free.
>>16567397Wetness is a quality, water is an object. Gills filter water, not wetness. When you live an existence entirely submerged in water, everything is "wet" and you have never experienced "dry." Without that point of comparison, you can't understand what wetness means because you have no concept for anything being otherwise. We understand wetness because we observe both wet and dry things, but fish just LIVE in water so wetness is not a quality they can appreciate.>>16567398>we don't live in a free country because laws exist, and limitations are the opposite of freedomYou are autistic.
>>16567395Stop being so psychopathic and pretending like your obviously false pretense just boils down to your inarticulateness rather than the absurdity of your claims.
>>16567405Correct we live in a hierarchical country utilizing the rule of law rather than an anarchic freedom land where you can freely act without legal consequence.> Gills filter water, not wetness. No, its dry air inside their lungs, so gills necessarily filter both water and wetness.
>>16567407That's not what I'm doing. I'm rejecting the premise that anything less than literal omnipotent godhood can't be called freedom. It's a retarded argument that goes nowhere because no person who says free will exists considers free will to be the absolute absence of limitations. There is a middle ground that exists in which you have freedom to choose things within the scope of your physical abilities.>>16567409>Correct we live in a hierarchical country utilizing the rule of law rather than an anarchic freedom land where you can freely act without legal consequence.And so therefore we have NO freedom? Freedom DOESN'T EXIST? I CAN'T MAKE CHOICES because laws limit which choices are reasonably consequence-free? This is just blatantly retarded autism.
>>16567419You are still making choices, and they still affect your life. It's just been in the sand before you decided to.
>>16567385that's false, you can have random ideas which are not determined. stop being silly. science knows brain samples stochastic noise and there's a correlation between more stochastic noise sampling and intelligence. thus ideas can come randomly. just like literally every human experienced so far. that is not determinism anon. that is my brain coming up with ideas that are unbound from previous experiences. it's literally random. it's free.for some reason this concept makes some of you error out.
>>16566773Your internal awareness of all that changes if the matter inside your head changes, good luck explaining how if you think it's some magical property not related to matter
>>16567687>when you damage the interface between two things it changes how they interactWow, whoa, crazy...
>>16567690>interface>muh radioretardso when someone gets banged in the head and do 100% personality change they tuned to another soul? ARE YOU FOR FUCKING REAL????you can hijack souls just like that? knocking someone in the head steals a soul from the soul factory?
>>16567694>[some dumb bullshit I made up that no one actually suggested even remotely]? ARE YOU FOR FUCKING REAL????Don't let me interrupt, go ahead and keep arguing against yourself.
>>16567695>yeah it's like radio but I'd look like an idiot saying itnotice how you made no argument
>>16567724I said nothing about "tuning in to different souls." Everything you said in that post is a pure and total strawman. Why does a personality shift necessitate a whole different soul? If my car is damaged in a way that severely affects its handling, does that mean I'm not the one driving it any more?
>>16564637“Consciousness” is a word used to describe sensory observations that we have remembered (including stuff people have told us that we attempt to understand)
>>16567749you are implying whatever you do to a brain it will always be that same "soul" no matter the behavior/personality. that's a wild statement. somehow you know this. you have no proof, but your feelings are clearly not lying to you.
>>16565007>consciousness is like the atoms H+OSo the atoms of H and O are conscious, they don't act the way they act because external forces compel them, they actively choose to act like fungible H and O atoms?
>>16565161So if illusions are all just illusory doesn't that mean nothing is an illusion and everything is as it seems since being an illusion is just an illusion?
>>16565234>Reality only exists because there's a consciousness there to experience iAccording to you, consciousness can only experience material reality since destroying the material destroys the conscious experience.
