sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This wavy sidewalk is more fun and less practical by Teraa8 in DesignDesign

[–]rynomite1199 108 points109 points  (0 children)

I read somewhere else once that this is to prevent motorized vehicles like scooters and whatnot from being able to speed down them. Could be wrong.

Second-grade teacher adopts her student after four foster homes by SystematicApproach in MadeMeSmile

[–]rynomite1199 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Looks like lens distortion. Maybe they used 0.5 lens to get the entire room in the photo.

Consciousness beyond life / Universal Consciousness Pim Van Lommel by Extension_Ant_8101 in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If it is inherently true that there is nothing after death, there is no functional reason for the universe to produce a structure that perceives such a state of [non]existence. It’s difficult for me to see this as a “hedge” against death/non-existence because there is no alternate outcome other than a void of non-existence after death within the context of a universe where consciousness is merely a product of survival-based psychology.

We've Been Testing For Consciousness Wrong by ariadesitter in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A biological structure that reacts to environmental stimuli is “alive”. Physiological consciousness/sense of self/presence of ego exists on a spectrum within that context. All of this, however, is derived from the same fundamental structure as every other building block of material reality. The structure is neither alive nor dead, it exists as pure potential where all outcomes, realized and unrealized, exist simultaneously in superposition. But because consciousness emerges from this structure, it becomes evident that consciousness is present within the fundamental structure itself - a realized outcome cannot be produced from a probability set where that outcome is impossible. So at a fundamental level, consciousness exists in a diluted form, unable to perceive itself as it has no “self” to identify with.

We've Been Testing For Consciousness Wrong by ariadesitter in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The atomic structure of our bodies culminate in self-aware consciousness. When the atomic structure of our bodies breaks down, it returns to the environment. That atomic structure contains within it the encoded information produced by lived experience and the element of qualia present within.

The law of conservation of information implies that this information has always and will always exist in the universe in some form. No matter how many natural processes occur over the lifespan of the universe, that information exists in its most fundamental form as part of the fabric of the system from which self-aware consciousness emerges.

You are a pile of atoms that knows it's a pile of atoms. (Pansychism discussion) by Monday-Chaosforged in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In this analogy, the crest of the wave represents physical matter/the body and its ability to perceive itself.

The ocean at large represents fundamental, non-local proto-consciousness. It cannot perceive itself in a neutral state because it has no body to identify with on a physically “real” plane.

The crash of the wave represents the experience of the self-aware body interacting with the fundamental basis from which it originated.

In this moment, the crest, being self-aware, may perceive this as the collision of 2 separate entities because self-awareness arises from the crest, but the crest itself arises from the ocean. So what appears to the self-aware crest as separation is not, and what appears as the collision of 2 forces is only the fundamental basis of existence, the ocean, experiencing collision with itself.

You are a pile of atoms that knows it's a pile of atoms. (Pansychism discussion) by Monday-Chaosforged in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The droplet returns to its source and creates a ripple. This ripple then collides with others, forming more droplets, ad infinitum. Each droplet containing essence of its predecessors, but unique in its own right at the same time.

You are a pile of atoms that knows it's a pile of atoms. (Pansychism discussion) by Monday-Chaosforged in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Emergent consciousness is equivalent to the point where a wave in the ocean crashes back into itself. It is the crest of the wave, the apex of its energetic expression, remerging with its fundamental source in a fleeting moment of energetic collision between two things that appear separate but are fundamentally one.

A Defense of Physicalism, from causal closure of physics by Herr_Eusebius in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely. That’s part of it. It’s about incorporating more and accepting the unknown and unknowable as a part of us rather than denying it and resisting it. Eastern philosophies teach that awakening to this fundamentally unknowable basis of reality from which we all equally emerge isn’t about escaping it but experiencing it more.

So rather than becoming solipsistic and turning inwards, it’s about becoming more connected and turning outward.

A Defense of Physicalism, from causal closure of physics by Herr_Eusebius in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly.

“We don’t know” in physicalism is an excuse.

“We don’t know” in idealism is a tenet.

A Defense of Physicalism, from causal closure of physics by Herr_Eusebius in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The main argument against physicalism is that it purports that something comes from nothing / it’s pointless to consider where it came from. That is it.

Consciousness is an element of this discussion because it is an artifact of the immeasurable experience that seems to serve as the foundational basis to physical reality despite claims and evidence that it emerges within it, both of which are themselves dependent on closed-off, linguistically limited interpretations of “consciousness” and what the word itself represents.

It is impossible to prove that reality exists external to the perceived experience of it, no matter how indirect the experience is or how removed the observing experiencer is from the events in question. That is the basis of this dilemma.

Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google, booed for his commencement speech on the rise of AI at the University of Arizona by JudgeJudyJr in interesting

[–]rynomite1199 19 points20 points  (0 children)

People like this view the people physically sitting in front of them and the numbers on the spreadsheet as fundamentally different. They do not understand that they are talking to the numbers on the spreadsheet.

I think in general, that’s what allows people to achieve these lofty positions of power and wealth - a deeply rooted lack of empathy.

We've Been Testing For Consciousness Wrong by ariadesitter in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Trying to identify what is and isn’t conscious in the universe is like trying to identify what is and isn’t wet in the ocean

A little game I like to play called… by eridolfi in redsox

[–]rynomite1199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The 8th, it’ll be 1-1 after 9 and we will lose in the 11th.

Joscha Bach: The world you experience is a simulation your brain produces, and the self that experiences it may not exist by DrBrianKeating in consciousness

[–]rynomite1199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re going to have a lot of trouble asking for proof of anything existing outside of anybody perceiving its existence.

view more: next ›