3 ms·
This is a case of "scientism", not science. Science is only equipped to address claims that are falisifiable. The question of whether or not there is a self isn
by tharne 3y ago
This is a case of "scientism", not science. Science is only equipped to address claims that are falisifiable. The question of whether or not there is a self isn't something that can be proven or dispproven, since consciousness appears to be an emergent property rather than a thing that can be pinned down and measured.
- oilchange 3y ago> since consciousness appears to be an emergent property rather than a thing that can be pinned down and measured. Emergent properties can be pinned down and measured. Molecules have measurable emergent properties. The viscosity of water is an emergent property and you can measure it. https://www.britannica.com/science/systems-biology#ref1218077 https://www.britannica.com/science/systems-biology#ref121807... Much of science deals with emergent properties. Strange that you'd say science cannot pin down and measure such properties. Neuroscience will one day what self and consciousness is by showing us how the collective parts of the brain interact to bring about the emergent property of consciousness/self. That is if computer science doesn't do it first via generalized artificial intelligence. My best guess is that the self is an illusion/lie resulting from consciousness that gave humans an evolutionary advantage.