honestly this whole argument about penrose, gödel, non-computability etc feels way too complicated for what seems pretty obvious to me, humans are complex biolo

honestly this whole argument about penrose, gödel, non-computability etc feels way too complicated for what seems pretty obvious to me, humans are complex biology with basic abstractions: we take in sensory data, process it moment by moment, store it with varying abstraction levels (memories, ideas, feelings), and evolve continuously based on new inputs, evolution itself is just genetic programming responding to external conditions. It looks random sometimes but that's because complexity makes it difficult to simulate fully, small variations explode into chaos and we call it randomness, doesn't mean it fundamentally is. The whole thing about consciousness being somehow outside computation just feels like confusion between being the system (external view) and experiencing it from within (internal subjective view), doesn't break computation...there’s no fundamental contradiction or noncomputability introduced by subjective experience, randomness, or complexity, just different perspectives within the system. If you want to understand say genius for example, go into neurology and look at raw horse power and abstract thinking.. Neurological capacity (the hardware), Neurodiversity (the software style), Nurture (the training data and tuning environment) - (Mottron & Dawson, Baron-Cohen, Jensen & Deary & Haier). It's part of why I personally think we're really at the point that spiritual/godly exploration should be the most important thing, but that sounds woo woo and crazy, I suppose. (I probably just over simplified a bunch of stuff I don't fully understand)