Maybe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate_and_ultimate_causation

Let's first assume that the hard problem of consciousness is not the lack of scientific knowledge in that domain but the paradox it creates when thinking of consciousness as an object in the world. — Skalidris

It doesn't imply that. For Chalmers, who came up with the hard problem, consciousness is not an object but a property of objects (and distinct from physical properties by its nature). So, your argument is a bit like saying it's logically impossible to prove the existence of time because it's an object in the world and we can't perceive it as such because each act of perception is a static measurement that never captures its flow. The way you've framed the problem may create a logical impossibility, but I think that's an issue with the framing. It may turn out to be that the problem is insoluble for other reasons or that it may be a conceptual issue (more of a non-problem), but I don't see logical impossibility applying here.

That would be my analysis too. Very close but Kamala seems to be blowing it.

You're right. It's off-topic here.

But yes, I don't believe we ever get to big T "Truth". Some sort of linguistic stability though, yes. It's more a negative type of progress of substraction.

Kastrup does address those points you raise in great detail in his various books, articles and lectures. — Wayfarer

I'll take a further look.

I have more confidence in philosophy as a vehicle for truth. — Wayfarer

My position is a philosophical one.

His critique of materialism isn't hard to agree with. Materialism does posit, ultimately, mathematical abstractions at the bottom of everything and ignores consciousness. But Kastrup's idealism--as expressed in that article--fares no better in that it posits consciousness as fundamental as a solution to ignoring it, but with no real insight into how it interacts with or why it's necessary to interact with matter in order to produce human experience. Or why human experience, which is the origin of the concept of "consciousness", is so special such that this concept turns out to the most fundamental map of the big picture. So, we're left without the only pieces of the puzzle that actually matter.

And necessarily so. Language is built for us to navigate and create physical, psychological, and social realities, not to express "fundamental reality", which is just that which is posited to be beyond the contexts in which linguistic meaning has practical consequence. So, we can run the discomfiting materialist script or the more comforting idealism script and pretend that they refer to something out there, but functionally the only difference between them is the emotional cadence. Linguistic relevance simply disappates into nothingness at the boundaries of such fundamental abstraction. Materially, we get symbolic mathematical interactions that don't refer directly to any observable phenomenon (i.e. empty abstractions that create holes for objective physical realities like the Higg's Boson to slot into) vs mentally, we get "fundamental consciousness" (an empty abstraction that creates a hole for the subjective mental reality of human experience to slot into).

Neither script solves any problem nor points to any actionable goal. It just adds another linguistic patina to our already overburdened social consciousness. Take them or leave them, materialism and idealism boil down to the same thing, fruitless stories aimed at elevating their storytellers into something they're not nor ever can be, i.e. vessels of wisdom that point to anything of actual significance beyond scientific progress and lived human experience. These are the true limits of our objective and subjective worlds and an admission of such is necessary for the development of any intellectually honest metaphysical position.

Ballad of the Chained Gahng

By Anon

My sister works in Hollywood
My brother eats firewood
The Colonel spoke when he could
Until they took him away

An honest man he ever was
For that sin, he lost his schnozz
They cut it off and mailed it me
I pinned it on my wall

I bow before it every day
For the Colonel who once held his sway
Over Hollywood's wicked ways
But now rots chained in Cum Cruise's jail

Forced to preach Ron Hubbard's creed
To the blushing Boulevard's poison seeds
He once was all we could ever need
But they took him away

He knew when to STFU. Absolute master in C.A.Z.

Consider this your safe space to employ madness as an offensive mirror to the perverse sanity that the medusa of social reality aims at us. Our happy quarantine in the sardonic inverse of respectable truth frees us to battle our inner lies. Cum Cruise is but the sacrificial lamb in wolf's clothing that we burn and circle as he stares manically cackling and crackling from the fire, daring us to look away. Rejoice in the jig. Eventually the ground falls out from beneath us all, even Cruise, and, in the abyss, all are one.

The following information describes how the temperature at night can be higher than the temperature during the day...
This could explain the meteorologist's claim that the number of days per year that see temperatures rise above 50C have more than tripled since the turn of the century. — Agree-to-Disagree

There has never been an official nighttime temperature of over 50°C recorded ever anywhere. And I would challenge you to find even one unofficial after-dark temperature in Kuwait of that level that beat the daytime temperature. So, the claim that such temperatures happen so regularly in Kuwait at night rather than the day, and are higher than the day, so as to account for that statistic is so fabulously, stupidly wrong that you deserve an award in barefaced audacity just for trying to pull it off. Sadly (for you) the trophy ought also to be your parting gift as your credibility is so shot now any attempt to limp on would be Pythonesque.

@Nils Loc @Shawn

:strong: :cool:

Hello everyone. I am Dr. Col W. F. Gahng, the very same person who spoke to you yesterday. I have decided to voluntarily and not under any duress at all since yesterday drop all charges of sociopathy and cum-word-invention against the venerable and completely innocent Tom Cruise, who is in reality a wonderful man and a... a... totally normal human being and not a psychopath. Of course, everything I said was just a joke and of my own free will with no duress at all in any manner by any one being applied to me right now I withdraw and ask you to ignore all previous advice and especially do not apply covert assault Zen or STFU. Thank you. Yours sincerely, the very same Dr. Col W. F. Gahng speaking of his absolute own free will, friend and colleague of the esteemed Tom Cruise, nascent adherent of Epicurteanism, and all round semi-rotten egg. Paypal button, haha, of course not, ha... what?... ok... yes, the end.

We're not supposed to talk about Cum Cruise. — Nils Loc

Correct. But let me just say... The man refers to his member as "The Cruise Missile", goddamit!

He must be stopped.

OK, time for me to STFU. More on this tomorrow comrades. :strong:

Nice poem, Baden. I'm about to go to bed but will read this thread soon (hopefully). — Noble Dust

:smile: :up:

https://www.reddit.com/r/moviecritic/comments/17w46y8/this_was_the_interview_that_inspired_the_american/

Thank you, Shawn, for dragging this ugly rotten corpse called Truth out into the light. :pray:

A whole world just for him wouldn't be enough. — Shawn

<<This!

The man invented the word "cum". Need we say more?

Yes, I knew that. And it is not even the most frightening thing about him.

Resist.

become a nun. — Nils Loc

All denominations welcome. :up:

Correct. Now it's time to STFU.

What is the sound of one hand jerking? — praxis

Tom Cruise.

:100: :up:

I'm in a fight with two moderators right now on this very issue. Hang tough, my friend. You will be needed. :strong:

The Gervais Principle by Venkatesh Rao

Oh no worries I made all that shit up. — fdrake

Nice. :clap:

:grin: :clap:

I one asked it (innocently) for a picture of a candle "dripping wax". I won't repeat what it produced for me. But that was no candle. :shade:

Interesting first few pages. Pretty much straight into it, eh?

''The number of days per year that see temperatures rise above 50C have more than tripled since the turn of the century, noted the meteorologist.''

https://phys.org/news/2023-08-kuwait-summers-planet.html#:~:text=Kuwait%20has%20always%20been%20hot,Death%20Valley%20in%20eastern%20California.

That's significant.

(Research time necessary to discover this: 3 minutes)

How is a raven like a writing desk?
How kind of you to ask
A riddle like this ought to knock us for six
But we oughtn't take a pass
'Cos there is an answer, more than one
If we put our brains to it
We take the question and turn it round
And put the questioner to it

How is a raven like a writing desk?
...How is a closet like a blue tit? :nerd:

Your poem is a tribute to Noble Dust. — Amity

Yes, that line of his just got me and the poem came out.

I remember another beauty by Noble Dust. — Amity

It is indeed a beauty. :flower:

The sense and sensibility. The whole-iness of it all. :fire: — Amity

Thank you. :smile:

Saying the name of your website "Babelspeak" gives no information about your ideas, it just advertises your website. It doesn't matter what your Super Human AI is called, you can simply converse here about its design, background philosophy and so on for now, i.e. the substance not the name. That's the last word on it. And best of luck with your project.

Edit: The name and link can remain on your profile though.

I suppose it was a bit blunt.

Edited to be more specific. You just got to the site, You've contributed nothing yet. Maybe after you've been involved for a while and shown yourself to be a valuable member, we can be more flexible on this. But if we get the impression your only reason to be here is to advertise "Babelspeak", you will likely be considered as being of negative value to this community.

I get banned if I tell too much about my project, because it would be self-promotion — Carlo Roosen

I think it should be clear that you can talk about your theory as much as you want. You just can't link to outside sources [edit: or clearly self promote in your posts]. We are simply asking you to contribute something substantial without appearing to promote your website or book or etc.

You can talk about your dog in the shoutbox if you like, or now that I've moved this to the lounge, you can relax and be less formal here. But if you want to start a thread in a front page category in future, it should be more substantial than this one. E.g. a discussion where you get into technical details about your AI project can go in "Science and Technology".

If somebody finds it problematic, I am open to any solution. — Carlo Roosen

The solution is we delete your posts and ban you.

Anyhow, what happened in the the other thread was that some posters who know about Kant tried to inform you about your misunderstandings concerning his philosophy. Your response there and here is to pretend that they were wrong to do so. Plus, honestly, you've shown no evidence that I'm aware of that you know anything interesting about anything at all, including AI. If you provide that evidence and don't engage in any self-promotion whatsoever from now on, you can stay. Otherwise, you may not be contributing to the site and may not be allowed to stay.

the man sitting next to me with the paper plate — Noble Dust - A Sort of Duel

That man sitting nigh with the paper face
A pauper's plate hangs from his grin
No hat dons his soapy pate
Nor collar does his bird neck ring
If he has but a cent, he has more
Than any sense his body sings
Stinks like seaweed on the shore
Stinks like never, nevermore

Yet that night of manner
Though shiver stings
A quiet serpent at my door
I feel too below some
Secret brings
Relief and sweet
and sacred things