Sentience doesn't exist

Kek

>evolutionary reasons
But evolution is literally blind to sentience unless materialism is false.

>But evolution is literally blind to sentience unless materialism is false.
What?
Let me try explaining again.
-changes in DNA that makes your brain be bigger than it actually is
-brain has more neurons
-thus more neural connections
-can now compute things it previously couldn't
-can now compute "i must eat to survive" instead of just "must eat"
-brain being bigger means its smarter and can do these things
-since its smarter it also survives more
-thus it spreads
The "i must eat to survive" is where consciousness started. Sentience. It's an illusion.

>I think therefore I am
I can prove it to myself, but not to you.

I used to unironically firmly believe in solipsism but then started going to Philosophy forums and saw that other people who I initially thought were just like NPCs also commonly asked the same kinds of questions. It makes me think that everyone who looks like a human such as myself also is conscious. Just because you can't perceive someone's consciousness doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

yep, but obviously it's impossible to prove anyone else is sentient. I'm glad you changed your mind because obviously I and everyone else is sentient, but a skeptic is justified in believing in solipsism.

>obviously x
>belief in not-x is justified
Maybe if x is obvious this shows the not-xers are doing something wrong.
Materialistic evolution can work on brains but it can't work on sentience. Sentience would have to get matter to do something it wouldn't normally do for it to possibly affect anything including evolution.

>Materialistic evolution can work on brains
Which is why it works on sentience.
>Sentience would have to get matter to do something it wouldn't normally do for it to possibly affect anything including evolution.
Nice special snowflake syndrome! What makes you think that sentience is not something matter can create? Are you suggesting it's something "immaterial" or maybe even "spiritual"? Do you also use geometric cosmologicalism as an argument for humans to be the center of the Universe?

I'm self aware, so your statement is easily disproven, as far as I care.

Sentience? As in the capacity to feel or perceive? I didn't think that one was up for debate. Fairly easy to confirm in even basic life forms.

Usually when we have one of these stupid threads, someone uses the term "consciousness" or at least "sapience", in one of the more spiritual or philosophical senses of the terms.

Now I could assume that's what you meant, but I'll bite it as presented and ask, how does one disprove sentience, without simply waving all reactions as simple consequence of determinism? (Which, even if that was the case, would do nothing to remove the fact that things react to stimuli.)

>What makes you think that sentience is not something matter can create?
Didn't say that though I do believe it. I said it's something evolution can't work on unless materialism is false.

The problem is causal closure in materialism.
Say matter creates sentience. When it does it's either still obeying laws of physics or it's not. If it is then sentience has no effect on any process in the material world including evolution.
>immaterial
Makes more sense than saying it's material.
Please describe how sentience is or arises from material.

>>immaterial
>Makes more sense than saying it's material.
>Please describe how sentience is or arises from material.
Oh I see. I am arguing with someone who thinks consciousness is immaterial.
Well, [math]was[/math] arguing.

>mocks immaterialism
>can't say what's wrong with it
>can't justify belief in sentience arising from material

>>was
>runs away like a little brainlet

So many points to go over, where do I even start...?
First of all, let me adress the structure of your post. You're using a fucking wojak image, representative of all the post Gamer Gate cancer that destroyed Veeky Forums for good. That image is supposedly transparent and in solid colours, but you saved it as a png and, on top of it, it's a fucking 5k[math]x[/math]5k image with fucking 363kb, like why even the fucking shit do you need that. It shows that not only you're Veeky Forums cancer, but internet cancer in general since you've clearly never heard of internet etiquette, you don't know you're not supposed to contribute to potential server overflow not even in the slightest. You use Reddit spacing and you make complete misuse of greentext. This itself is so much bullshit in such a small post that even the most anti-ad-hominem philosophers out there would consider an exception solely for the purposes of calling out your complete idiocy.

But now to you are actually suggesting.
This very simple post of yours contains the word, expression and concept belief. My friend, this is the science board, not the paranormal or religion board. If you have a "belief" in something, you belong in boards like /x/ or Veeky Forums, not in the fucking science board. "Belief". Holding a "belief" that something is true, false, real, unreal. What a fucking joke. As if that was not enough, the whole concept of immateriality is unfalsifiable by its very definition, there's no material way to get to something immaterial, which is all the more reason why you're just spouting out pseudo-scientific pop-sci bullshit you know nothing about and all the more reason this belongs on /x/ or Veeky Forums, not on this board, you pathetic idiot with the brain power of a mushroom. Even if we ignore the fact it's unfalsifiable, even if we ignore you choose to believe things rather than test them, the idea of immateriality is still contradictory to the idea of an immaterial consciousness because of a number of paradoxes, contradictions and other problems that would arise from this. A few examples. If consciousness is immaterial, why does it seem to be confined to a material thing - the brain? If consciousness is immaterial, how does it even connect with the material world? If consciousness is immaterial, why is it bound by the laws of the material world? Isn't immateriality contradictory to the fact consciousness exists within an Universe that is fucking material? And if it's a truly immaterial thing like a spirit, why be confined to the feeble human body? Couldn't it just wonder around like a ghost, spirit or god?

Even if you do have an answer to all these questions, a simple Occam's Razor would rule out this pathetic piece of shit attempt of a "theory" which is really just plain outright mysticism as non-viable because it implies so much shit that it would be just easier to assume the truth, which is there isn't an immaterial world and we are indeed just indeed sad lumps of organic matter. I could continue to analyze this pathetic idea that is the immaterial consciousness into oblivion, I could twist it in ways you would never recover from it, brainlet, but Veeky Forums's character limit is really annoying and I have better things to do with my life, unlike you. So just face it fuckwit, you're not special. Life is meaningless. It's nothing but misery and suffering. There isn't a god waiting for you in Heaven when you die in pain like the animal you are. Now stop being an embarrassment to yourself, this board, your family and friends (if you have any, and I won't say "to your girlfriend" because I know you don't have one anyway, fucking loser).

If you truly are an adept to this theory, try proving it by shooting yourself in the head. Let's see if you genuinely believe this shit or if you're just another idiot with existential delusions.

Oh look you came back.
>muh green wojak png
bitch deal with it
>believes beliefs are a joke
>believes in unproven paradoxes
>thinks occam's razor is a physical object
>has better things to do than type out pages of character limited buttrage
>types them out anyway
>kys
dude get a grip

You still haven't explained how sentience arises from material. Obviously you can't because it doesn't but it would've been nice if you had something that at least sounded plausible.
If you can't square sentience with materialism the Occamist thing to do would be to stop assuming you can, and since we 100% definitely know sentience is real that means materialism isn't.

I certainly don't know that

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_brain
Y'all heard of this?
I think sentience ceases to exist as we "zoom" in further and further into subfunctions of the human brain, if you get my gist

Define exist.

Occam's Razor is a heuristic, not a method of proof.

Just passing by :)

Why would anyone care to prove anything to someone who isn't sentient? I don't prove to my food that I have the right to eat it.

This is true of literally everything. See a glass of water>>>zoom in>>>see nothing but molecules: OMG WHERE DID THE GLASS OF WATER GO?!?!?!

i think, therefore i am