according to the model i'm operating from. — punos

How does sentience know how to react to the stimuli? Intelligence. — punos

not exactly my vision of the next phase. — punos

consciousness is fundamental — punos

Intelligence — punos

I project that another emergence, as unique to consciousness as physics is to life, will occur at some point in our future. — punos

“living” — Punshhh

Which one is better evidence of the color of your eyes - hearing someone telling you your eye color, or looking in the mirror? — Harry Hindu

humans mistake statistical or biological tendencies for moral truths

Did you even read the post you were responding to? — Harry Hindu

Ever looked in a mirror? — Harry Hindu

misleading starting point — Metaphysician Undercover

I don't like the idea of ​​a state without a constitution. — Astorre

The universe does not tolerate deviation.
A proton has a precise charge of +1. An electron orbits in fixed quantized shells.
Water always freezes at 0°C under standard conditions. These are not arbitrary
properties—they are fixed, consistent, and inescapable.

This cosmic selectivity creates coherence: without it, there would be no chemistry, no
biology, no consciousness. If nitrogen had three electrons “once in a while,” the
periodic table would collapse; the fabric of reality would disintegrate.

Thus, the rigidity of law is the condition for existence.
Without selection, there is no identity. Without constraint, there is no form. The
universe is selective because only selectivity can sustain being.

And I asked YOU why do you need to know? — apokrisis

there is also the cosmological argument which demonstrates that there is necessarily an immaterial actuality which is prior to all material existence. — Metaphysician Undercover

Explain — apokrisis

Can you think of a test that would detect sapience or consciousness? — bert1

Not just sexes, pretty much everything is being stereotyped. — baker

Modern moral thought seeks to dissolve rigid patterns—arguing that social identities and roles should be fluid, inclusive, and adaptive. But the question arises: if the cosmos thrives on patterned predictability, are we defying natural order when we reject all categorization?

Perhaps political correctness is not a rebellion against truth but against the misuse of truth.
Where the laws of physics are descriptive (they describe how matter behaves), human “laws” and social codes are often prescriptive (they dictate how people should behave).
Confusing these two is the origin of moral error.

Thus, it is not that rigidity is wrong or that fluidity is right—but that cosmic rigidity serves being, while social rigidity often serves power.

If the universe’s consistency ensures existence, and its entropy ensures change, then perhaps human liberty is the social form of cosmic entropy.
Too much rigidity yields tyranny. Too much fluidity yields chaos.
Thus, just as the cosmos balances order and disorder, civilization must balance law and liberty.

Racism and sexism are not “natural laws” but misapplications of pattern recognition.
They emerge when humans mistake statistical or biological tendencies for moral truths.
The difference between physics and prejudice is the difference between observation and judgment.

You take materialism to be true — Metaphysician Undercover

simple unboxed freedom. — apokrisis

What about hydrogen and oxygen? — RogueAI

According to me of course. — punos

Indeed it is. — punos

Why is the universe, a scattered body without any central command, hellbent on sustainability and manages to do so uniformly without direct communication between the elements?

Which is easier to prove? That it is or that it isn't? — punos

If something appears anomalous or miraculous, it is because we do not yet understand its natural nature. — punos

Chaos is just hidden order. — punos

space — punos

the universe is always certain about what it will do in the next moment in time. — punos

How would you prove or observe machine consciousness? — RogueAI

one of the outcomes of consciousness is free will. — Copernicus

Supernatural? — punos

Why would a universe that values order also permit chaos?
Perhaps because rigidity without decay would yield stagnation. Entropy ensures transformation.
If the laws are the skeleton of the cosmos, entropy is its pulse—its motion through time. The two are not contradictions but complements: order defines the possible, entropy defines the dynamic.

The cosmos, then, is not a tyrant of predictability, but a governor of structured uncertainty.

Is it possible some machines are conscious? — RogueAI

Why is that? — Harry Hindu

If we can reproduce intelligence "artificially" then why not cells? — Harry Hindu

Test them for what? What would that show? — bert1