3 ms·

I'm confused by your question. I'm hearing it like "does it matter if there are many gravity wells or just gravity?" because I believe science will once day fin

I'm confused by your question. I'm hearing it like "does it matter if there are many gravity wells or just gravity?" because I believe science will once day find consciousness is the 5th fundamental force, perhaps the one the ties the other four together

int_19h 2y ago
What I'm saying is whether consciousness is a fundamental force or not is orthogonal to whether it has free will.
- labrador 2y ago
  So you're saying a conscious Universe could still be Newton's "clockwork universe"? Well, Einstein did say "God does not play dice with the universe" but I think the quantum direction is where the riddle of consciousness may be be found. The beauty and terror of our own minds is the uncertainty that lies in the choices we make and the outcomes we get from those choices.
  - int_19h 2y ago
    I don't think quantum mechanics fundamentally changes things, either. If you look at it from the Copenhagen perspective, sure, you get randomness, but I don't think many people would seriously argue that adding a true RNG to an otherwise mechanical contraption makes it any less mechanical, even if it becomes unpredictable - the real question behind "free will" is not whether branching is deterministic, but rather whether the entity has any degree of control over it. And if you look at it from the many-worlds perspective, then you just have parallelized determinism. My personal take on this is that the question itself is meaningless because we cannot define "free will" in any coherent way that is actually testable. It all boils down to defining what "conscious" and "self" mean, which are themselves very fuzzy concepts that elude clear definitions. My solution to all this is to just stop wasting time on it, since I don't think there are any practical implications to it (and if there's no free will - whatever that means in practice - then my opinion is itself predetermined in any case).
    - labrador 2y ago
      I agree with you that the question of free will is a waste of time, which is why I generally avoid it. Maybe if you are a student of Catholic Church doctrine and have a final exam coming up? Sapolsky does not write from a Catholic perspective, but his audience might have been brought up with it so his writings might be provocative for them and thus profitable for him. I've been watching his career with more amusement than irritation. He is classic case of a regular guy becoming an "influencer." The same thing happened to Jordan Peterson. At the same time [2015] I found Sapolsky's lecture on depression I found Peterson's. Both not well known at the time. Both lectures really helpful. Both now well known influencers.
nojvek 2y ago
It’s natural for human brain to find explanations for the supernatural. We are born with a “God” placeholder in our brain, just as infinity is a concept. The idea that consciousness is 5th fundamental force sounds great but doesn’t make any sense. Everything in universe is interaction of particles in force fields. We have mathematical definitions for them in standard model of physics. And consciousness is what we experience in our brains as a model of reality. It’s a much more complex emergent concept arising from how neurons are wired together to process input -> output signals. Consciousness boils down to signal processing. Which down the stack of atoms and subatomic particle requires the fundamental forces. Very different things. Put in a different way, they are fundamental because they explain everything in observable universe. That being said, I respect your right to believe.
- labrador 2y ago
  > emergent concept arising from how neurons are wired together That's a magical concept as well. A theory like mine. Time will tell. I only wish I was around when they figure it out.
  - nojvek 2y ago
    The problem with consciousness is most people have varying definitions of what they mean by it. Most don’t even believe any other animals other than humans can be conscious. Or that computers can be conscious.
- labrador 2y ago
  I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness. - Max Planck

int_19h 2y ago

What I'm saying is whether consciousness is a fundamental force or not is orthogonal to whether it has free will.

labrador 2y ago
So you're saying a conscious Universe could still be Newton's "clockwork universe"? Well, Einstein did say "God does not play dice with the universe" but I think the quantum direction is where the riddle of consciousness may be be found. The beauty and terror of our own minds is the uncertainty that lies in the choices we make and the outcomes we get from those choices.
- int_19h 2y ago
  I don't think quantum mechanics fundamentally changes things, either. If you look at it from the Copenhagen perspective, sure, you get randomness, but I don't think many people would seriously argue that adding a true RNG to an otherwise mechanical contraption makes it any less mechanical, even if it becomes unpredictable - the real question behind "free will" is not whether branching is deterministic, but rather whether the entity has any degree of control over it. And if you look at it from the many-worlds perspective, then you just have parallelized determinism. My personal take on this is that the question itself is meaningless because we cannot define "free will" in any coherent way that is actually testable. It all boils down to defining what "conscious" and "self" mean, which are themselves very fuzzy concepts that elude clear definitions. My solution to all this is to just stop wasting time on it, since I don't think there are any practical implications to it (and if there's no free will - whatever that means in practice - then my opinion is itself predetermined in any case).
  - labrador 2y ago
    I agree with you that the question of free will is a waste of time, which is why I generally avoid it. Maybe if you are a student of Catholic Church doctrine and have a final exam coming up? Sapolsky does not write from a Catholic perspective, but his audience might have been brought up with it so his writings might be provocative for them and thus profitable for him. I've been watching his career with more amusement than irritation. He is classic case of a regular guy becoming an "influencer." The same thing happened to Jordan Peterson. At the same time [2015] I found Sapolsky's lecture on depression I found Peterson's. Both not well known at the time. Both lectures really helpful. Both now well known influencers.

nojvek 2y ago

It’s natural for human brain to find explanations for the supernatural. We are born with a “God” placeholder in our brain, just as infinity is a concept. The idea that consciousness is 5th fundamental force sounds great but doesn’t make any sense. Everything in universe is interaction of particles in force fields. We have mathematical definitions for them in standard model of physics. And consciousness is what we experience in our brains as a model of reality. It’s a much more complex emergent concept arising from how neurons are wired together to process input -> output signals. Consciousness boils down to signal processing. Which down the stack of atoms and subatomic particle requires the fundamental forces. Very different things. Put in a different way, they are fundamental because they explain everything in observable universe. That being said, I respect your right to believe.

labrador 2y ago
> emergent concept arising from how neurons are wired together That's a magical concept as well. A theory like mine. Time will tell. I only wish I was around when they figure it out.
- nojvek 2y ago
  The problem with consciousness is most people have varying definitions of what they mean by it. Most don’t even believe any other animals other than humans can be conscious. Or that computers can be conscious.
labrador 2y ago
I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness. - Max Planck