It's also the same idea put forward by Donald Hoffman's User Interface Theory of Perception. — Malcolm Lett
Overwhelmingly, we agree about more than we disagree. — Banno
??? — 180 Proof
Same with us, no? There also is "no empirical way of knowing" (yet / ever) whether any person is "conscious or faking". Which seems more reasonable, or likely, to you, Wayfarer (or anyone): (A) every human is a zombie with a(n involuntary) 'theory of mind'? or (B) every entity is a 'conscious' monad necessarily inaccessible / inexplicable to one another's 'subjectivity'? or (C) mind is a 'mystery' too intractable for science, even in principle, to explain? or (D) mind is a near-intractably complex phenomenon that science (or AGI) has yet to explain? :chin: — 180 Proof
Trying to understand the terminology. If full-on consciousness can be of not very much experience/very little content, is our consciousness also full-on, but with much more experience/greater content? — Patterner
My thought is that there isn't any not having an experience. — Patterner
One way or another, the capacity for consciousness was always there in the first place. If the capacity wasn't always there, consciousness couldn't exist. — Patterner
How so? — 180 Proof
True. We just don't know how it comes about. — Patterner
So what accounts for "qualia" other, or more efficacious, than "physical/functional properties"? — 180 Proof
For every (a implies b) it's always true that (not b implies not a), correct? Even if it's not always useful to bring it up, it's always true? — flannel jesus
And yet the fact is that we don't know what consciousness is. — Malcolm Lett
And when does one call a living thing conscious? — Benj96
Part of the difficulty lies within developing a concrete definition of “life” or “living systems” in the first place. — Benj96
I would take this to suggest that even if something like smallism is true, it will nonetheless require some sort of major paradigm shift that allows for some sort of "emergence-like" phenomena to occur to resolve this impasse. — Count Timothy von Icarus
It was in the context of explaining the Advaita doctrine of manifestation or emanation, by which Brahman manifests as the sensible world. — Wayfarer
As Plato's Euthyphro implies: morality and laws cannot follow from the decrees of "God or gods", javi — 180 Proof
On the one hand, given that the brain is itself, it should have no trouble knowing itself. In practice, there are a number of problems with that notion. — Malcolm Lett
Our perception of consciousness is equally subject to the same perceptual hallucinations as all other perceptions. — Malcolm Lett
You can rely on wikipedia for information and I will keep on thinking through the presuppositions and implications of philosophical topics (e.g. 'panpsychism = animism'). — 180 Proof
'panpsychism' is metaphysically indistinguishable from Stone Age
animism — 180 Proof
The economic system we have divides all adult citizens into employers and employees. — Vera Mont
Things without a mind are not conscious/aware. — Lionino
In that case , aren't non-living things' consciousness different nature to the living things consciousness? — Corvus