3 ms·

The "it's just math" argument may not be technically rigorous, but it's directionally correct. The unstated reasoning invites us to consider why this particular

The "it's just math" argument may not be technically rigorous, but it's directionally correct. The unstated reasoning invites us to consider why this particular math would be conscious, but not many other forms of math all around us.

throw310822 6mo ago
First, it seems you've shifted from "intelligent" to "conscious". "These math operations produce consciousness" is different from "these operations produce intelligence". Second, "it's just math" doesn't mean literally "it's a branch of algebra". It means "it's a computable function". So it can be relevant to the discussion only if you think that intelligence is somehow non-computable, and therefore that there are non-computable processes going on in our brain. Otherwise it's a perfectly pointless remark.
- sarchertech 6mo ago
  The person you replied to isn’t the one that switched to conscious. >non-computable Something like 70-80% of all humans believe in a soul or spirit, and of the remainder, many of them are unsure whether human like intelligence can be produced by computable processes. So it wouldn’t be surprising that the OP does think there are non-computable processes going on in the brain.
  - throw310822 6mo ago
    > The person you replied to isn’t the one that switched to conscious Yes he is, the message he replies to is about intelligence: >> Intelligence (and probably consciousness) is an emergent feature > Something like 70-80% of all humans believe in a soul or spirit Then they should say "I believe intelligence only comes from the soul" or "I believe intelligence is not computable", if that's what they mean. "It's just numbers" as an argument is either incomplete or not entirely honest.
    - root_axis 6mo ago
      > Yes he is, the message he replies to is about intelligence No, I'm not. The comment I replied to is the one that mentioned consciousness.
- root_axis 6mo ago
  > First, it seems you've shifted from "intelligent" to "conscious". Not true. Take a second look.

throw310822 6mo ago

First, it seems you've shifted from "intelligent" to "conscious". "These math operations produce consciousness" is different from "these operations produce intelligence". Second, "it's just math" doesn't mean literally "it's a branch of algebra". It means "it's a computable function". So it can be relevant to the discussion only if you think that intelligence is somehow non-computable, and therefore that there are non-computable processes going on in our brain. Otherwise it's a perfectly pointless remark.

sarchertech 6mo ago
The person you replied to isn’t the one that switched to conscious. >non-computable Something like 70-80% of all humans believe in a soul or spirit, and of the remainder, many of them are unsure whether human like intelligence can be produced by computable processes. So it wouldn’t be surprising that the OP does think there are non-computable processes going on in the brain.
- throw310822 6mo ago
  > The person you replied to isn’t the one that switched to conscious Yes he is, the message he replies to is about intelligence: >> Intelligence (and probably consciousness) is an emergent feature > Something like 70-80% of all humans believe in a soul or spirit Then they should say "I believe intelligence only comes from the soul" or "I believe intelligence is not computable", if that's what they mean. "It's just numbers" as an argument is either incomplete or not entirely honest.
  - root_axis 6mo ago
    > Yes he is, the message he replies to is about intelligence No, I'm not. The comment I replied to is the one that mentioned consciousness.
root_axis 6mo ago
> First, it seems you've shifted from "intelligent" to "conscious". Not true. Take a second look.