joeberon

19 ms·

91.
by joeberon 5y ago
As a doctor in quantum physics, we probably will be able to test between interpretations in the future, so you should not use this as an argument.
92.
by joeberon 5y ago
What's this got to do with "emerging as a field"? Yes Maths is hard, yes generally people don't like to do it, but that doesn't mean it hasn't "emerged as a field".
93.
by joeberon 5y ago
What are you talking about? Mathematics has well and truly "emerged as a field" lmao
94.
by joeberon 5y ago
AI/ML research is not "way bigger" than astrophysics lol
95.
by joeberon 5y ago
Your comments are marked as "dead" and must be vouched for by a member of the community with high enough "karma" (such as myself). It is a Hacker News anti-spam feature that you seem to have become the victim of.
96.
by joeberon 5y ago
It may not reflect reality in any way but I still have this fundamental "worry" or feeling regardless. This machine is still worrying about it.
97.
by joeberon 5y ago
I can't find a reason to deny that
98.
by joeberon 5y ago
Yes, people who believe that consciousness is an emergent property of sufficiently complicated systems would say that a sufficiently complicated computer experiences qualia and is conscious.
99.
by joeberon 5y ago
Yeah I think you have to misrepresent to get people in, but personally I don't like that. I would rather we don't lie about it and Buddhism (for example) dies than we misrepresent it.
100.
by joeberon 5y ago
This is personally my feeling of it too. I think the boundaries between us are illusory, and that it is all continuous and fuzzy. So a universal consciousness is no issue for me, one that is neither singular nor separate.
101.
by joeberon 5y ago
Faith is a fundamental part of Buddhism. Even if you decided to become a Buddhist now, it is really unlikely you would be able to achieve significant progress, because we are in the Dharma ending age and only extremely high capacity individ
102.
by joeberon 5y ago
> Have you considered that maybe the only path to victory for Buddhism is by being flexible enough to rise above the bollucks? If it were true that such flexibility in doctrine were necessary for liberation, the Buddha would have taught
103.
by joeberon 5y ago
Yeah that's a pretty common experience actually. There are a lot of memes on tiktok and twitter joking about "gaining consciousness" as a child. I think a lot of people remember moments as young children where they first trul
104.
by joeberon 5y ago
I haven't experienced that the teachings need to change personally, but yes the emphasis needs to. Unfortunately westerners are being fed teachings that are more like "this meditation will make you experience a sober LSD trip&quot
105.
by joeberon 5y ago
> Teachings need to be updated and modernized as we progress as society. I don't think there's any way to do that without understanding them, but to understand them fully you basically have to become a Buddha...so it is not cle
106.
by joeberon 5y ago
Personally I think most people who argue consciousness is an emergent property of complicated physical systems would believe that the machine would still be conscious after replacing every neuron with a chip
107.
by joeberon 5y ago
That's the problem and exactly why I say I don't think it can't be explained via a vague feeling. I've never seen someone who says there is a hard problem of consciousness adequately explain to someone why there isn&#x27
108.
by joeberon 5y ago
> Any block of matter arranged just so is conscious in that framing, which differs from the religious framing. That is literally the secular materialist view of consciousness, yes.
109.
by joeberon 5y ago
I don't have it, because it's not my argument, it's their argument, and it's clearly making you emotional so I think it's better to stop it here.
110.
by joeberon 5y ago
A vast majority of people who believe that consciousness is an emergent property would also say that a sufficiently advanced computer is exactly as conscious as you or I. At least when I believed that human consciousness was an emergent pro
111.
by joeberon 5y ago
Yeah I think a more interesting problem is asking what the difference between an electronic robot that behaves in every way like a human, and a human, is. Or further, an electronic robot where every single neuron in the human was completely
112.
by joeberon 5y ago
Those same people might say that it is just the experience of "being the computer" rather than seeing it from afar. But I don't know, because personally it isn't an argument I find convincing. As an aside, I think you ha
113.
by joeberon 5y ago
Well we do know emergent phenomena that occur as abstractions. Probably the most obvious example is a computer program. At a basic level, the computer really doesn't look like it's doing useful work, it just processes lists of rul
114.
by joeberon 5y ago
Eastern philosophy isn't impenetrable, and people who cannot penetrate it aren't hampered by cultural difference. Even for natives of those cultures, penetrating that philosophy often takes years of spiritual practise and training
115.
by joeberon 5y ago
So far the only answer I've seen people give to the question is "what problem? There's no problem". Basically, there are many people who don't (or also have convinced themselves that they don't) perceive an inc
116.
by joeberon 5y ago
That's why many people, including myself, believe that it has been so long since the Buddha's nirvana that it is now much harder to attain liberation in this world. That's why I practise to be reborn in Amitabha's Pure L
117.
by joeberon 5y ago
I imagine Chinese lay Buddhists are often Pure Land rather than Chan no? I used to practise Soto zen with a teacher but now I’m Pure Land, but I don’t know which tradition yet. Pure Land doesn’t need a teacher or temple to be safe and effec
118.
by joeberon 5y ago
One problem for those people is that the motivation is wrong unless there is right view. If you don’t realise samsara, and don’t realise that everything is on fire (see fire sermon) and wish to escape, then why are you practising? Unfortuna
119.
by joeberon 5y ago
There was never a transmission of Buddhism that rejected all of the core teachings and doctrine. Why would you even want to call yourself a Buddhist if you reject Buddhism? It is just fashion to these people. It’s like being a communist who
120.
by joeberon 5y ago
Then there’s no problem

More ›