What do you think about concept of consciousness...

theres the feeling of consciousness and there are unfeeling decision making processes in our brain

consciousness results from the recursive computation of sensing oneself sensing oneself. the infinite recursion is ultimately resolved by the universal interpreter at the heart of the universe which we commonly call the soul.

i figured this out on edibles.

yeah probably
i dont know how you retain something that isn't real but for what you mean, yeah, whatever is made would be just as conscious as you probably

Agreed.
People really struggle with the concept that what it is to experience themselves is NOT separate from the physical reality of being themselves. Everyone has this concept that we are some non-corporeal thing that sits within the head behind the eyes driving some machine....but brain damage/lobotomy/etc confirms this not to be true.

>99% sure that's what it is
And I'm 99% sure that god exists. I came to the conclusion that there is no such thing as science and that god just is.

It's funny how you bring up the whole machine argument. There is actually a fascinating experiment done where the left and right hemispheres of the brain are separated and they actually disagree with each other. It is super weird, it's almost like they are their own living organism and we are just a machine.

>it's almost like they are their own living organism and we are just a machine

not it isn't.

I'm not saying that is the case, just an interesting experiment that shows how little we understand about the brain. :)

typical brainlet refusing to accept reality

>i figured this out on edibles

truly the highest form of the scientific method

No, I just study animal behaviour and behavioural cognition for a living.

i guess you could be a philosophical zombie, i can't prove that you aren't. but i certainly know that I, at the very least, have an internal experience of my life. because I'm experiencing it right now.

> transfer human brain into a computer
Not likely. But the brain is essentially made of tiny transistors, and we're starting developed implants to repair damaged portions of the brain for things like strokes and seizures, so it seems feasible to replace your brain piece by piece like the ship of Theseus, so there's no discontinuity. Then you can finally have your robot waifu.

Have we found the one in a billion people who live among us as a philosophical zombie? If there's people with aphantasia it seems reasonable that there are just zombies. user, go see a neuroscientist right away show the world that some people aren't really alive so it's okay to kill them.

All instantiations of consciousness are pieces of the mind of God. Being the union of all things, and that which is both more and less than this union, God contains all potentiality within himself. The universe is the continual process of the mind of God unfolding and splintering in order to express its potentials and observe them, before ultimately reintegrating into the one which contains all things and is also nothing.

"The great circle whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere to be found"

LSD and mediation are great hobbies

Ever read any David Chalmers

Replicate, yes 100%. It's just a matter of understanding the human brain. Transferring it? That's a lot harder and might not be possible without killing the brain.

Theoretically with advanced science i think you could clone a consciousness onto a computer, but I think moving a consciousness from a brain to a computer is impossible. Your consciousness is inseparable from your cells in your brain.

but quantum mechanics introduces randomness to the universe.

>no such thing as an original idea

Obviously there is. There is a first time for everything.

>There is actually a fascinating experiment done where the left and right hemispheres of the brain are separated and they actually disagree with each other.

source?

>so it seems feasible to replace your brain piece by piece

Even if you replace part of the brain with an identical copy I think you would lose the essence of consciousness that makes you who you are. From an onlookers perspective you would be Identical, but your consciousness would be lost piece by piece and replaced in part by a separate consciousness. Now this isn't perfect but Imagine the left hemisphere of your brain attached to the right hemisphere of my brain, they may work together but there would be a conflict of consciousness.

consciousness posting is worse than IQ posting

There is no such thing as consciousness. It's just the brain asserting to itself that it exists.

>It's just the brain asserting to itself that it exists.

but that IS consciousness no?

Nope. Recommend?

How about this: what people THINK and try to define consciousness is actually just the brain asserting to itself that it exists. Consciousness doesn't even exist the way people think it does. We're really nothing more than just complicated machines. It's like trying to define a god. Too many different interpretations and no real basis whatsoever.

Scientists mapped out the neurons in the brain of some sort of worm, I read about it briefly but don't have much time to read into it more. If you can map it, surely you can simulate it in a computer?

sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170810104956.htm

Also, it's not even like being a complicated machine is even required to be conscious. Like, even your couch has a solipsistic viewpoint of the universe, it just doesn't have any capabilities or memories or thoughts to process that whatsoever, so infinite time goes by in an instant for it. It's not animism because animists usually believe things around them have feeling, but I don't. They do have a solipsistic viewpoint of the universe, though.

I can't wait to copy my neural map into a computer and then kill my biological self and still have myself live on in a computer. The problem right now is that the CPU is a horrible bottleneck, as consciousness only happens when it's actually being processed in the CPU and not when it's sitting around in RAM. You wouldn't notice it, of course, if you were living in there, but it makes manufacturing such a machine really difficult. We'd basically need to have actual hardware registers in a Gordian knot structure like your actual brain for it to process every point in parallel efficiently.

this pretty much. Though I don't think it makes it any less magical or spiritual or whatever. Its built into existence itself that everything that exists is logical in some interpretation (from the perspective of other logic) The thing is, for anything to exist there needs to be that key thing, perspective, something interacting, 'seeing' that which exists and proving it does by the action of seeing. This happens at the lowest levels actually, of course at that point its just particles hitting one another, but that is the base. And it is extremely important.

One question/group of questions I think that gets you going in the right direction is asking this: What actually is information? What actually is a 'bit' of information?

Binary isn't the stuff of computers, its the stuff of consciousness and existence. Computers deal in it because computers are the base of what will become consciousness far beyond our own. The existence part already has been happening for awhile (the creation of simulated universes)

>Like, even your couch has a solipsistic viewpoint of the universe

Stop taking so many drugs.

Will quantum computing fix this?

Quantum programming languages already exist, albeit probably not very advanced.

Yeah, one of the best philosophers of the mind right now. You may very well change some of your positions after reading him, he addresses exactly what you're saying

>I can't wait to copy my neural map into a computer and then kill my biological self and still have myself live on in a computer.

This is just about as stupid as it gets.

Thanks for the tip. I'll have a read when I finish writing my paper hahaha

if you don't make it a gradual process you personally will still experience your death. On the other hand it doesn't actually matter. You'll "wake up" as your simulated self, except you won't, because thats just who you'll be. The reality is we're all the same, we're all part of the same system, and so what drives our consciousness is universal. What really matters about "YOU" specifically is your identity, your personality. If there are two of them, it really doesn't matter whatsoever if one of them dies.

It can't feel and has no thoughts and isn't self aware at all, but it does have a viewpoint of the universe.

>DAE ideas come from drugs? xD

I'd tread carefully, because "quantum computing" is really just a buzzword and is nothing more than >DAE quantum computing will solve everything xD

Really all it would take is a massive, MASSIVE restructure of computers, that would need to be routed in a neural network topology for it to be anywhere near efficient. I don't think we even need quantum computing memes. Our brains do it just fine made of squishy carbon based cells communicating chemically.

Our reality is 100% deterministic just think on that for a moment!

>if you don't make it a gradual process you personally will still experience your death.
I know, but who cares?

>On the other hand it doesn't actually matter. You'll "wake up" as your simulated self, except you won't, because thats just who you'll be.
Pretty much. And it'll be interesting because I'll get to see how I'll react to dying from another point of view...Something that is pretty mindblowing and almost creepy to think about.

Plenty of people have arrived at conclusions like this without drugs. It's been a while since I read "Of Monadology", but Leibniz arrived at a lot of conclusions along these lines and the only drug he ever did was mathematics

...but it wouldn't be you.

If I copy a file on a computer from one physical media to another, it's still the same file. Same with neuromapping.

>Plenty of people have arrived at conclusions like this without drugs.

Yeah, dipshits.

Some of you people are so retarded it hurts.

>i don't understand thing and it angers me

the state of Veeky Forums is pretty sad

I understand it well enough to know its retarded. Hippy mumbo jumbo bullshit. The sort of stuff they use to get people to join strange cults.

You sound like a creationist.

>all name calling, no arguments
pathetic brainlet

>no arguments

this stuff is so retarded I don't need a argument. These theory's are arguments against themselves.

okay mr. pseud, enjoy being a p-zombie for lifez

the more I've thought about this the more I realize I would actually gladly die, like I'd gladly kill myself, as long as I knew an exact clone of me and my personality exists.

Though realistically I'd just stay alive and try really hard to be better than my other self. Hopefully he'd do the same instead of becoming hedonistic.

>the more I've thought about this the more I realize I would actually gladly die, like I'd gladly kill myself, as long as I knew an exact clone of me and my personality exists.

you're a fucking nutcase.

this one gets it. Pic related, we're all just time, entropy, moving along. We specifically are intelligent models of external stimuli, which allows us to understand time more accurately. But the lack of understanding doesn't mean that theres no consciousness.

It is maybe important to note that consciousness as we know it requires at least some pretty decent intelligence, so while a couch or an atom or electron may have an 'experience' of the universe, theres nothing of value in that experience unless intelligence holds it together.

You and I would be the same person if not for all the atoms and space blocking communication between our neurons.

No...you've made a copy.
The moment you (not that it's even plausible) mapped your neural network onto something else then at that very instant they are no longer the same thing as your mind and the copy's mind's subjective reality is instantly different.

You're not copying a static object/file. The instant you separate the environment/data feeding into two separate neural network clones is the very instant that synaptic weights will start differing and so forth.

>Pic related
>doesn't post pic

>Transfer human brain into computer
If you mean replicating the architecture of every neuron in the brain, this would only probably get you half way there. A lot of our personality is derived from our brain reacting consciously and unconsciously to signals and chemical responses that occur throughout the body and not just our minds. If you want to replicate the person, the minimal you would need to do is create the body molecule by molecule. Anything else would be a thing. After that, you would have to adapt the machine sensory data to this virtual body. You could create a virtual person but this would be a cheap copy I think and it would certainly not have consciousness.
Comparing Human to this digital human would be similar to comparing bacteria and crystal. One is certainly alive and the other is not.

I think the concept of consciousness has been raped by people who wished they lived in a fantasy world.

On one end, I think some people see it as a scapegoat, as if they are enslaved by a process. Some people are morons about it, thinking everything is their fault, or that there is nothing they can do to help themselves. Other people are more realistic about it and see themselves as part of the process, making what decisions they can to help themselves, like not getting in situations where they have little choice and face high risk.

On the other end I think people believe consciousness is a freedom endowed upon humans though some divine purpose that connects all mankind. This side is split into many groups with unique belief systems to support this "intuition", yet each group's beliefs are based on speculation, confirmed by speculation/hallucination, and upheld as unconditional truth. Despite the mountain of assumption on which these people operate, they think they are enlightened, touched by divine purpose, gifted with truth.
And then it becomes their motherfucking divine purpose to tell anybody and everybody all about this truth. To force it on their children, to advertise it to the world so obnoxiously but so subtly that it permeates your every single day. It's on your money, it's all over tv, it's in the books, it's in every hotel nightstand, it's in the law, its in the culture, I T IS FUCKING RELENTLESS.

BUT IT'S NOT IN SCIENCE AND IT NEVER WILL BE

>Is it possible to transfer human brain into a computer or at least to replicate it in any way and still keep consciousness?
Since we haven't developed such technology yet, no it isn't possible.

That's exactly what it is

Every animal on the planet, with a brain, has an "internal experience"

But do we talk about dog consciousness? Usually we don't. Which is stupid, because we should.

Seriously how come we never talk about animal consciousness - chimpanzee consciousness, dog consciousness, cow consciousness, etc

Given that you can have a computer hooked into your brain and nerves, and given that you could have said computer record and "observe" your activity/synapses/nerves for some amount of time, and given that the computer is advanced enough to do the above and make predictions (allow circumstance based off probability) while being able to update itself WHILE NOT interfering with "you" to change who/what "you" are....

Yes. It's not impossible, but it's asking ALOT. What I ponder about theories/questions such as these is not if they are possible, but if just the SLIGHTEST environmental changes over time can corrupt/render inaccurate the recording or "you"....of "you".

I'm going to sound off from myself from saying this, but is that, considering ALL possibilities outside the norm, an absolute truth? Can there be no conflicting consciences in an individual?

If so, I'm not saying it is acceptable behavior unless you want to continue this conversation on /Pol/, how do you explain highly intelligent and achieving individuals in history who believed they came from something else?

Here is the source, it really is fascinating. :)
m.youtube.com/watch?v=wfYbgdo8e-8

After ruminating on these questions I arrived at a conclusion that consciousness should be universal phenomenon in universe. Let's suppose we have a super powerful computer on which we can map every atom of the brain with all the quantum probabilistic effects. Let's suppose that it has consciousness. We can reduce this super mega computer into hypothetical guy, who has an endless scroll of data, pencil, eraser and pair of dice for probabilistic calculations. He sits at a table and performs all the calculations that a computer does and we doesn't care about the speed of calculations, they can take as much time as needed - be it all the eternity - the simulation won't have a feeling of the "outside" time. Now what boggles my mind where the consciousness would reside? Maybe it has something to do with informational structures and is just a fundamental law.

It is possible - after all the human body is just software running on top of hardware - we just call it biology and psychology. The question is of the minimal complexity that is required to create a functionality similar to the human brain.
And also in terms of consciousness, copying ones brains to a computer wouldn't transfer your own consciousness to the computer, as consciousness is your point of view, and simply converting the neural signals in your brain wouldn't cause your view point to transfer with them.

Are you talking about free will, god or consciousness here?

People do. I think about it often.

you don't even understand what the theories are saying

No. All our memories can be collected in a big asscrap book but it wont be any consciousness in it. Btw, do we even know what consciousness is?

I, like most Veeky Forumsducks, am convinced that consciousness is an emergent property of a complex neural network. Thus, it theoretically should be possible to build an artificial neural network capable of the same emergent property. Even though the hardware required is - probably - not available yet.

>your couch has a solipsistic viewpoint of the universe

you're saying that when atoms are close together they have some form of basic consciousness. And I'm saying that's retarded.

>itt autistic people lacking a right brain discuss what it is like to be a robot zombie.

>Your consciousness is inseparable from your cells in your brain.
lol

>Even if you replace part of the brain with an identical copy I think you would lose the essence of consciousness that makes you who you are.
lol

Not him but prove the opposite. If you destroy cells you lose memory, if you have them you have memory. The only things that can be regained are loss connections to memories/abilities by repairing damaged branches.

why so many consciousness threads

Neural network os another buzzword. Consider it as "vectors and matrix multiplication and shit".

holy shit great post dude. just kidding, it's literally incoherent.

anyone who believes consciousness can be explained just by objective accounts of brain processes and functions doesn't truly understand what philosophers refer to when they use the term "consciousness". Take the term to mean one's internal experience. if you are a materialist, meaning you believe there is no more to a human than physical matter, chemical reactions, etc, you face to problem of trying to explain how a purely physical thing gives rise to an internal experience. (If you try to deny internal experience, by the way, you are throwing away the only thing you have access to, and the very thing that all your beloved empirical data passes through!) You might be tempted to say "well my internal experience of the world is also physical, just like my body." Well, ok, then how much does your perception of the color red weight? what is it's shape? what is the mass of your experience of listening to music? clearly these questions make categorical mistakes. because you can't try to apply the measurements we use for physical things to non-physical phenomena. i just want Veeky Forums to humor some form of dualism rather than reject it because of autism. it's logically coherent, and there are many good theories that explain how non-physical consciousness can arise from the brain. read up on chalmer's naturalistic dualism, or any brand of emergentism. (searle, hasker.) many dualist theories are surprisingly lucid and free from many major issues that materialist positions have. all too often materialists just argue against a shitty strawman that is reminiscent of descartes and think they've solved consciousness

You are asking a bunch of nonsensical questions that we can't answer 1)Because you'd have to break open someone's fucking brain to measure it.

2)Thoughts are the ability to analyze internal information so they don't have some type of magical quantity, they are a process.

So the answer to your question would be to look at which freaking cells in your brain light up with some sort of technology and calculate their weight since you are a smart ass.

Or better yet tell me the weight of all of the electricity of your computer that it took to make this post? Oh you can't answer it? It's obviously magic.

so you think that, pain for example, is c-fibers firing in the brain? but then explain why that should culminate in a feeling in the first place, and not just be a physical process with no accompanying sensation? obviously there are neural correlates to any experience, the brain is closely linked to experience. but you can't simply say "c fibers firing is the same as pain"; say you're a primitive person trying to explain what fire is, and all you know is that "rubbing sticks together causes fire"; would you say "oh, then clearly fire is simply the rubbing of sticks together." No, clearly. one is a cause and one is an effect. Tell me what pain is, user. since you're clearly so enlightened on this topic.

also while i'm waiting your response, please quote the part of my post where i ever called consciousness "magic". good luck, because I didn't.

>start making response while high
>get distracted over and over
>finish it anyway, hours later before i sleep
i clearly stopped trying to be coherent in an obvious way, only a retard would point it out like i didnt realize it

are you proud of this somehow?

>philosophers

Philosophy is (in most cases) fabricated drivel with only a loose correlation with reality.

The Idea that consciousness is separate from the physical reality is non scientific nonsense.

what? what are you even talking about?

if you feel the need to be proud of all your posts here not only are you proud of shitty posts , but you are excessively vain

that isn't true. philosophy is an attempt at truth-seeking, while science is a mere attempt at modeling our observable world. i respect science a lot, but empirical data is not the end-all of knowledge. it would sober up a lot of people here to appreciate philosophy as an undertaking towards the must profound truths. anyways, apart from your aversion to the field of philosophy, do you have an answer to any of the main points i raise?

it's just that you sound proud that you got high and wrote a bunch of meaningless shit on Veeky Forums. good for you i guess.

well either you dont know what proud means or are reading into things too much. i wonder if you are insulted because i talked bad about religion

im not religious so no.

Denying Materialism because we have not discovered the answers to consciousness does not give licence to throw it all out the window in favour of non-physical consciousness (AKA magic)

>Well, ok, then how much does your perception of the color red weight? what is it's shape?

This is mostly just me speculating as I've done very little research into this but I'd say It weighs as much as the electrical signals that bounce around between neurons or maybe as much as the signals and a number of neurons combined in a specific way? The shape?
who knows, but there almost certainly must be a shape of some sort right? what the shape is is unimportant. Memories must be an arrangement of the matter in your brain no? So the matter in your brain must be malleable to an extent. meaning "one's internal experience" is the movement of signals within the brain creating and querying a formation of matter to create memories. Memories in storage are perhaps queried by your present consciousness (which is the movement of signals in another part of the brain that deals with the present)?

>I just want Veeky Forums to humour some form of dualism rather than reject it because of autism.

Dualism is the illogical argument here. There is no evidence for it. Just because it cant be disproved doesn't make it credible.

i wonder why you felt the need to say this

pretty much

i'm not saying that. i'm saying it's possible. being anything other than a committed agnostic on the question is for brainlets.