3 ms·
I'm sympathetic to this view. But this paper relies heavily on IIT, and I thought there was some posts on HN recently from Scott Aaronson that had disproven II
by FrustratedMonky 3y ago
I'm sympathetic to this view.
But this paper relies heavily on IIT, and I thought there was some posts on HN recently from Scott Aaronson that had disproven IIT?
I checked Aaronson's web site and can't find the paper on discussing why IIT wont work.
Edit: Found it
https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=1799 https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=1799
- sandspar 3y agoThere's a kind of woo for everybody. Dumb people have favored woo, smart people have favored woo. Woo cuts across boundaries.
- lukasb 3y agoactually the paper turns away from IIT - the latter part of section 5 decides that “the electrical and magnetic fields within and around the sun seem a more promising starting point for a discussion of solar consciousness than IIT in its present forms”
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoThank You. I didn't get that far. Since they discuss some other methods, i'll go back. Do you think they touch on something potentially not 'woo', as others say.
- lukasb 3y agoNo, the whole thing is very woo. It's fun though. If you want something similar but non-woo read about bacterial chemotaxis.