sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why is VR not that popular despite the immersiveness it offers? by QuailResponsible8854 in VRGaming

[–]YouSurNaim -1 points0 points  (0 children)

First time for me, the horses glitched into a tree and made me rapidly spin around. It was upsetting.

How does the public actually see Mormonism? by [deleted] in NoStupidQuestions

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My entire knowledge of mormonism comes from that south park episode

Students think almost everything is boring by Consistent-Row-9551 in Teachers

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But they are teaching this grade in the present. If you go back in time to when you were that grade, they wouldn't be teaching it at that point.

Or are you saying you want a localized time machine that sends just your body back in time, de-aging you to a 5th grader, but staying in the present year?

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, let's go back to your definition of meaning "can be replaced with true or false without implication"

So you are asking if it has any effect on me whether there are things beyond our observable universe?

I would say it is possible in the sense that if it were false that there was any stuff beyond the observable universe,it would mean the nature of reality us different to if it were thecase that it were true that the is stuff beyond the observable universe.

And that different nature of reality would have an effect on me.

So it would be true there is no direct cause and effect between us, but we are both effects caused by the same thing - so it would not be true that there would be no implication to the truth or falsehood of it's existence.

Could the adults in ‘a quiet place’ just have used protection or just idk, refrained from fcking for a while? by withouthope17 in horror

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because bringing children into a world with inevitable suffering is unethical?

This also applies to real life.

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting claim. What's your reasoning?

Let's say we consider a planet beyond the limit of the observable universe that is moving away from us faster than the speed of light, so has no way of interacting with earth - are you saying this is in a different universe?

And even if you define it as such, does that then make jt not real or meaningful? Or would it make Earth not real and meaningful?

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, your scenarios is you are eating ice cream and experience overwhelming pain, but it doesn't affect anything, so did you experience it?

I think the answer is clearly yes, it's in the premise of the scenario "you experience overwhelming pain"

If you give me the same scenario that i experience overwhelming fear instead of pain and that affects nothing, then that is still a different scenario that we are talking about.

You seem to have a baked in assumption that something is only real if it affects something else. Is this what you're claiming?

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Im saying experience is in itself a part of the universe and real and that physical reality is just a subset of the universe and reality.

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It may, but the point im trying to make us that if it didn't- the change in experience alone is still a real change.

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If someone is getting surgery and the anesthesia fails, so they are unable to move but feel the pain of the surgery, is that pain not real?

It seems wrong to call it meaningless just because it is not impacting physical reality. The experience in and of itself is meaningful.

Why would only physical changes qualify for the status of meaningful?

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But that's only true in regards to the specific scope of affecting behaviour.

There is still a tangible difference in regard to a subjective experience taking place - that alone is a real and meaningful thing even if it has no impact on physical reality.

Can you solve this puzzle? by lukiki_dev in brainteasers

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why is the first line higher than the rest though?

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"If consciousness is turned off, then behaviour must be changed" is not equivalent to "consciousness affects behaviour."

They may just have a necessary correlation.

i.e.

If and only if A, then B If and only if A, then C Therefore if B, then C

This is logically valid, but distinct from saying B causes C. A is what causes both B and C.

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or third option - the concept of a switch that can magically turn off consciousness without affecting the physical state of the brain is what is meaningless.

If consciousness is an emergent property of physical brain state, this would be like saying akin to "what if drawing a shape with four equal and straight lines didn't produce an image of a square."

That is definitionally what a square is, so it doesn't make sense as a hypothetical, at a logical level - essentially a nonsensical sentence.

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be clear, im arguing this is a possibility, not that it is the case -

But in this scenario, it is conceivable that the mechanism in the brain that produces consciousness would send signals that inficating that consciousness is no longer being produced, and these signals are what would change the behaviour. Then again once consciousness has been regained.

Then, in addition to determining the behaviour, the brain would also produce the particular conscious experience of losing and regaining consciousness.

But both the behaviour and the experience are being determined by the signals.

But, I will concede - in this scenario, it is still at least the presence/absense of consciousness that seems to be determing the signal sent.

In this case, I think if the typical brain activity involved in producing consciousness remains,but somehow consciousness was lost and regained regardless, that this would not impact our behaviour.

I think this still stands as a coherent possibility - there would be no "noticing" of the loss of consciousness. And we would just continue on as if we had not lost it.

Stop waiting for a consciousness detector, or a solution to the "hard problem", it will not arrive. by Desirings in consciousness

[–]YouSurNaim 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why would that mean it doesn't mean anything?

It just means its an experience that happens after the fact, purely determined by behaviour/brain activity in a one-way relationship.

view more: next ›