3 ms·
"It seems some just can't grasp this concept.". Your confidence reveals your lack of knowledge. No one has a scooby what consciousness is or how to measure it.
by plutonorm 4y ago
"It seems some just can't grasp this concept.". Your confidence reveals your lack of knowledge. No one has a scooby what consciousness is or how to measure it. It could be that every atom has a modicum of conscious experience. It could be that consciousness is an emergent phenomena (although I think this claim is unlikely as it seems to me to be making a category error). It could be that it's actually Midi-chlorians. I repeat nobody knows. There are as many theories as there are people who have thought deeply about the problem. You coming along all confident with your debunking mindset and your scientism are just showing everyone who has any understanding that you do not know what you are talking about.
- prmph 4y agoTo me, it is those claiming that computation equals consciousness who are displaying hubris. Think about it, if we accept the theory that computation equals consciousness, then then is little to investigate further. Just calculate something, and voila, consciousness exists. It is this closing down of inquiry that I push against. My assertion is that consciousness is deeper, it cannot be reduced to computation. How would you even prove otherwise? If it arises from computation, what is conscious? Is it the algorithm? Is it the electric circuits? It is the physical machine? It is interesting to note my consciousness is bound up what a notion of what my body is. I can identify the limits of my body and make a distinction between it and my environment. What determines the conscious boundary of a entity performing calculations? On the other hand, there are many strong arguments against consciousness arising from mere computation, some of which I have enumerated.