Search results

12 Monkeys

Materialist vitriol at its best. I disagree therefore I hate.

This is a variation of the "in the next 30 years" cultish thinking. Will you change your mind if a molecular-level human brain model running into an exascale computer fail to produce a human mind?

I never said that. Just the opposite. Catholics believe that humans are not ghosts locked in a physical body. Human nature is destined to be the eternal union of spiritual soul and physical body. There's an obvious correlation between human mind and the brain. The soul is not the totality of the...

The correlation between material hardware and immaterial software is total. So software is physical. The correlation between human mind and brain is not total. Consciousness is a function of a thing (metaphysical soul). That's the problem with materialism/physicalism/scientism. They...

That's the ultimate experiment about matter vs mind. If materialism is correct that's exactly the result. But considering materialism is philosophically flawed I bet it will be empirically flawed too.

Physicalism is a joke in philosophy for a long time. I'm not appealing to ignorance regarding physicalism. Physicalism is logically flawed because states "everything is physical". But this very statement is metaphysical (monistic ontology). That's why (eliminative) materialists deny the...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_impossibility Like what? Be more specific. The mirror test and the spot test are very controversial. http://m.nautil.us/blog/when-does-a-consciousness-test-not-test-for-consciousness

I think Julian Jaynes made the best definition of consciousness.

Would be confirmation bias if I was avoiding the attempts to eliminate my position. But I'm doing the opposite. I'm very interested in the exascale computing and the Blue Brain Project and BRAIN. Naturally similar or better non human brains are empirical evidence that only fancy...

Yes I'm a "consciousness is not physical" fundamentalist. But I'm interested in the effort to try to build a consciousness. I just making a prediction or bet that it's an impossibility. I don't think trying to achieve consciousness is a waste of time because more sophisticated failures only...

If consciousness is physical then we could reach it without trying to replicate the human brain. Nature already has brains with the same complexity (or very similar or more complex) of human brain but there's no similar mind. If consciousness is so trivial to physical world why the internet...

https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer

Catholicism is an Eastern religion that also encompasses Judaism and mesopotamian lost religions. The account of creation is entirely from Mesopotamia for instance. I don't know any concept of reincarnation without karma (as cause and effect) being involved. Reincarnation itself can't be...

Do you really believe that we can retrieve the memory of your first kiss by scanning your brain?

I think you mean something like Buddhism. There's void between one thought (mental state) to another. Bergson said that mental states have no empty spaces between. Thr present mental state is a kind of an eternal moment that encompasses the entire past mental states without rupture of any...

When I mentioned "in Christianity", reincarnation was automatically excluded. Christianity doesn't accept reincarnation of the immortal soul (this is dogma). The immortal soul of every human is created directly by God at the moment of conception. St. Thomas Aquinas said animals and plants will...

In Christianity worldview animals have only the vegetative and sensitive soul, both souls are mortal. They dont have the immortal soul that's why they don't have consciousness. This is not a permission to animal torture. But we need some of them as food. Our biological evolution is based...

There's a fundamental difference between can't and don't in this statement. If you can't know truth, do you consider this statement as true?

You must believe in me because I'm a liar. If you accept logical contradictions as truth then what's the point of asking why? " Why" imply meaning. You can't talk about "better" in your scenario because is pure nihilism and not fallibilism as you proposed.

No.

This is not fallibilism. The example I mentioned (there's no truth) is a very well defined logical contradiction/paradox it's not just a "seemingly". Accepting logical contradictions as truth is (bad) faith.

The mind can't be discrete. Read Bergson. Someone at least. Because if someone says "nobody knows the truth" then this statement is the ultimate truth. And in this case if someone knows the truth then it's a contradiction. But truth cant be contradictory. And so on... I think a lot of...

The spiritual soul. Because it does not exist by itself. It's a contingency. Spiritual materialism is non sense. But a spirit is something, in Catholicism is adopted the aristotelian theory of substance (in the dogma of transubstantiation). Spirit is a metaphysical substance. Kant defined...

Crazy isn't? That's exactly what new atheists believe: consciousness (self) is just an illusion. God is an illusion and you is an illusion too. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliminative_materialism https://youtu.be/fajfkO_X0l0

Thank you for the tip. I'll read about it. I'm not sure but I think the concept of physical singularity was invented by Father Georges Lemaître when he created the Big-Bang theory.

Very good argument! Of course, as an INTP, I'm aware of AlphaGo, Deep blue and Watson. And as a Catholic I follow the thomistic philosophy. St. Thomas Aquinas said human beings have three souls (Jews talk about five souls). Two are mortal and probably are products of natural evolution...

Sure! I'm very open-minded. I know people now have the relativism (and Scientism: "everything is physical") as thought default and are very angry if someone does not share these worldviews. Sometimes people seems to forget the contributions of Christians in our civilization. Jung was a...

Try to read about the concept of duration created by Bergson (the most complex concept I know). "I change but I don't cease". Yes, it's a logical conclusion. Yes. I like Buddhism. Actually the premises of Buddhism and Catholicism are very similar. The difference is Buddhism stops in...

Sorry but you have no idea what an axiom is. No axiom is physical that's a non sense. No axiom can be tested or proved. Axioms are necessary truths. You are confusing axioms with theorems. Theorems can be tested in a sense but not empirically. The First Cause. IMHO God. I'm Catholic...

Basically I'm talking about metaphysics as ontology. And intuition as metaphysical perception. And things perceived by intuition as metaphysical entities. Being intuition a sense then which physical organ is responsible for the perception of intuition? And what exactly intuition perceives...

Of course science it's not concerned with metaphysics, that's why scientism is BS. But science is built upon metaphysics. I don't know how this following can be a natural view. If you know the scientific method is built upon metaphysics and human consciousness is the creator of the...

Science was created by Abrahamic culture. No other culture would bring the scientific method because all pagans believed matter is a god (Chaos) or a limb of God. You don't put God in a vial but you worship God and that's what all pagans were (and still) doing since the dawn of man. Only...

So show me. My point is nobody can create a conscious entity.

Pure scientism.

It's fundamental to choose the source of our knowledge about consciousness. If consciousness is physical then we are in a very contradictory worldview (because we accept metaphysical axioms to cope with the physical world). If consciousness is metaphysical then we have to consider the...

The source of your knowledge about your consciousness. If consciousness is physical we are in a very contradictory worldview. If consciousness is metaphysical we have to consider the implications involved like immortality. All phenomena is natural, How do you know that? This is...

Consciousness is the only thing that can produce metaphysical elements (like axioms) and work with them. So the default must be: "consciousness is metaphysical". Remember the Law of Induction from the very scientific method. The only way to change this view is creating a consciousness...

That's an example of a follower of scientism.

Of course. Taken to be true through pure faith. And axioms are only produced and accepted by consciousness. So consciousness is metaphysical since the start of any logical argument/system.

Correlation does not imply causation. You can alter the reception of a radio device by altering it but the broadcasting will not be affected.

Yes and I think that's Cracked. Me too. Yes. Dennett and Harris are totally radical because they say consciousness does not exist at all (eliminative materialism).

Not by trying to explain the metaphysical mechanisms like MBTI (a barely scientific attempt) for instance. But scientism says that the very causality of consciousness is physical. That's the leap of faith from scientism. Exactly. It's causality at least. Because inductive reasoning is "if...

Well this was already known before GI. Every logical system starts with axioms. You can't start without metaphysics. I think GI says that's impossible to have a closed system. Every system possible will always be contigent. If we apply the law of induction (one axiom from the SM) we must...

Could you explain more about this? Anyway "scientismists" say that a physical theory of everything (QM + GR) will explain consciousness. Wtf? This is the very premise of TS because is expected a superhuman consciousness emerging from computers/software. In simple words singularitans expect...

Because scientism hijacks science by saying that the scientific method is the ONLY way to get knowledge. Plus they say philosophy is nonsense. But their very statement upon SM is metaphysical. The very scientific method is built upon philosophy. Scientifc method is built upon several axioms...

Yes. I know TS it's not a conclusion from scientific method. That's exactly my point. If TS it's not from SM then only scientism is left as a source (AFAIK). Why? I think it's exactly what scientism says.

Scientism is a cult (the new imperial cult) that preaches the scientific method is a universal tool that soon will find the "theory of everything" which they say is the unification of quantum mechanics (cults love the quantum) and general relativity. They claim this theory of everything will...

Is technological singularity a kind of scientism on steroids? What you think?