5 ms·

You seem to extrapolate from a single sample that the probabilities of an “I” experience differs between individuals based on how similar they are to you. I wo

You seem to extrapolate from a single sample that the probabilities of an “I” experience differs between individuals based on how similar they are to you. I would say that if you can imagine other complex life forms without that experience it must be equally valid to assume the same can be true for everyone around you. Perhaps it’s only you.

andybak 5y ago
> Perhaps it’s only you. And thus solipsism rears it's slightly unsightly head once again. Solipsism has always had the virtue of being coherent - unlike many other theories in this area. I think pan-psychism also has this quality. The issue is they are both lead you to some bizarre conclusions. In some ways it's an analogue to the role Many Worlds plays in the philosophy of Quantum Theory. "cheap on assumptions, expensive on universes"... I do lean towards some form of pan-psychism. Or at least I'm not sure you can get to "I" from a strictly materialist starting point. However I think it's also likely that we're missing a fundemental part of the problem and these conversations will one day look like the babblings of children.
- CuriousSkeptic 5y ago
  I think its not only analogue to the many worlds, I quite suspect it’s the same problem actually. Or rather it seems we’re basically asking the wrong questions and therefore ending up with seemingly bizarre or contradicting things like particle/wave duality or the concept of time. How can we have consciousness when there is no objective “now”? To me the question of which processes experience consciousness is akin to asking if a sound wave is a crescendo or how many image frames in a movie is required to make a scene. Well, it depends... you might say, and the follow up question “depends on what?” is much more interesting. Some physicists say the world is fully determined. That there are at least four fully existing dimensions of space time, or even more than that given some interpretations of quantum mechanics. So we are given a static structure with certain patterns following specific laws of how the structure may be formed. Like if you made a 3D-print of a play of conways game of life. Now in that static structure we have this interesting phenomenon called consciousness that at first approximation looks like paths of focus tracing specific patterns. There might be just a single path, or many, or even a single connected path through them all as you say. I’m a compaibilist here, I don’t think it’s a difference with more substance to it than the particle/wave duality. It’s mostly a matter of perspective.

andybak 5y ago

> Perhaps it’s only you. And thus solipsism rears it's slightly unsightly head once again. Solipsism has always had the virtue of being coherent - unlike many other theories in this area. I think pan-psychism also has this quality. The issue is they are both lead you to some bizarre conclusions. In some ways it's an analogue to the role Many Worlds plays in the philosophy of Quantum Theory. "cheap on assumptions, expensive on universes"... I do lean towards some form of pan-psychism. Or at least I'm not sure you can get to "I" from a strictly materialist starting point. However I think it's also likely that we're missing a fundemental part of the problem and these conversations will one day look like the babblings of children.

CuriousSkeptic 5y ago
I think its not only analogue to the many worlds, I quite suspect it’s the same problem actually. Or rather it seems we’re basically asking the wrong questions and therefore ending up with seemingly bizarre or contradicting things like particle/wave duality or the concept of time. How can we have consciousness when there is no objective “now”? To me the question of which processes experience consciousness is akin to asking if a sound wave is a crescendo or how many image frames in a movie is required to make a scene. Well, it depends... you might say, and the follow up question “depends on what?” is much more interesting. Some physicists say the world is fully determined. That there are at least four fully existing dimensions of space time, or even more than that given some interpretations of quantum mechanics. So we are given a static structure with certain patterns following specific laws of how the structure may be formed. Like if you made a 3D-print of a play of conways game of life. Now in that static structure we have this interesting phenomenon called consciousness that at first approximation looks like paths of focus tracing specific patterns. There might be just a single path, or many, or even a single connected path through them all as you say. I’m a compaibilist here, I don’t think it’s a difference with more substance to it than the particle/wave duality. It’s mostly a matter of perspective.