Consciousness is a Quantum Entity

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by sirnex

 

The only 'thing' that exists is being. Yet 'being' is not a thing. So really it does not constitute existing in the way way see existing.
It is existance itself.

What is "being" How does "being" "exist" of it's own accord? What are the properties of "being"?

You're still not answering anything.

reply to post by sirnex



What exactly is a dream? How does a dream just exist of it's own accord? If nothing is dreaming, then how does the dream exist at all? What are a dream's properties? How does a dream that comes from nothing at all exist and produce entities that don't really exist that think they exist?

That is beautiful. Have you read what you have written?
That is a koan. Thank you.

And yes we have this dream with no 'individual' entities.
Consciousness is there though.
Something, something is aware,
Something is viewing the dream, or there is an awareness of passing patterns, colors,noises. Appearances and disappearances within the dream.

reply to post by sirnex


Being is being everything, everything that is here right now. Being is like a animal that contains you, but is you at the same time, it is all that you see, hear, smell, it is the sensation of this moment. It is life in the raw.
I don't imagine that the being exists of it's own accord, i don't know how that can be answered, do you exist at your own accord?
Have a look around, listen, hear, smell, taste and touch that's a good way of finding out what the properties of being are.
Enjoy.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


If you don't have an answer, it's ok to say so rather than delving into cryptic nonsensical musings.

Just saying...

Sirnex you never really say anything...this is the entire debate...

- Information.

Originally posted by sirnex
You're a loony, take some meds man.

- Why?

Originally posted by sirnex
Look it up, I'm not here to hold hands.

reply to post by sirnex


There are no answers. It is what it is and it ain't what it ain't.
The questions are a waste of time, but lots of fun when you know there are no answers.

Do you see a work of art as a question that needs solving?
So do scientists. Well, i don't believe that, scientists have a genuine interest and then are paid by the government and it gets a bit out of hand really. Still, life is not a puzzle, it is a work of art.

reply to post by sirnex

How does information interact with information without a materialistic medium?

By way of consciousness, not the anthropogenic complex consciousness which is associated with a functioning human brain, but the consciousness within which all existence is grounded.

Originally posted by sirnex

I mean I've argued with people who exchange the word qualia as if it means something inherently different than the word experience alone.

I see a certain wavelength of light as a color I define as a red.
A color blind person is unable to see that wavelength the same way.
The wavelength stays the same regardless.
Therefore experience or "qualia" of that wavelength means nothing, it doesn't change the wavelength or properties of light.

No matter how much we try to describe the inherent limitations of materialism, they will be stuck in their beliefs much like dogmatic religious folk.

What limitations? Materialistic science has brought many great scientific achievments, one in which right now you are using to bash it. Idealism has brought... wait for it.... Still waiting? So am I and the rest of the world.

Where did I ever say that materialism hasn't been successful at scientific achievements?...

The main discussion in this thread has been to point out the limitations of materialism explaining consciousness, not its limitations in the physical world, which it obviously has been very successful at explaining. I admit my wording wasn't very clear there, though.

reply to post by mysticnoon

By way of consciousness, not the anthropogenic complex consciousness which is associated with a functioning human brain, but the consciousness within which all existence is grounded.

Then what is consciousness? How did it arise? How does it function without a materialistic medium?

reply to post by AlphaZero

The main discussion in this thread has been to point out the limitations of materialism explaining consciousness, not its limitations in the physical world, which it obviously has been very successful at explaining.

So basically your saying because answer x doesn't exist answer y must be true. I would say God of the gaps argument, but your not necessarily arguing there is a god. Similar line of reasoning though, if you can even call that proper reasoning. We can't fully explain what gravity is or how it's propagated, but we do indeed have technologies that work through it. We might as well say that because we can't explain what propagates the force of gravity when we jump, that God is pushing us down back towards the earth because he loves us and doesn't want us to fly into space.

It's just as valid.

reply to post by sirnex


Isn't that the whole point, we don't know what consciousness is. It can not be measured. Science is all about measuring 'things'. Consciousness is like the physicists worst nightmare 'The measurement problem'. Atoms can not be measured unless they are stationary, they become stationary when we observe them.
We can not say 'i am not', so there is consciousness, that is proof that there is consciousness.
Without the prime fact of consciousness (i am, i can not say i am not), nothing else can appear.
Everything appears when consciousness is present. Not before or after. Only during consciousness.

reply to post by sirnex


Perhaps you are confusing the examination of consciousness from a Philosophical stance with that of a Scientific stance. Consciousness is, at present, almost impossible to explain through science sufficiently because the nature of Consciousness is not concrete or measurable. Even though this is the case, we can agree that it exists beyond a reasonable doubt and must have some basis.

Can you not admit that the Mind and Consciousness - at present - is beyond Science's ability to fully comprehend?

Originally posted by mysticnoon
reply to post by sirnex

 

How does information interact with information without a materialistic medium?

By way of consciousness, not the anthropogenic complex consciousness which is associated with a functioning human brain, but the consciousness within which all existence is grounded.

Good points,

People just ASSUME that conscious had to arise from something so it must have risen from the material. This is just wishful thinking. There's Zero evidence to support this notion.

Awareness/Consciousness exists and it's the foundation of reality.

For instance, subatomic particles are Aware. A scientist will use their credentials as scientist and say, subatomic particles are not aware but this is just a statement of belief.

After subatomic particles are entangled they are Aware of the posistion of their entangled pair.It's just like us. When I become entangled and interact with my new Michio Kaku book, I become Aware of the information in the book.

There isn't ANY evidence that says subatomic particles are not Aware. All the evidence says they are Aware. If someone wants to "believe" they are not Aware then that's just a belief. When subatomic particles interact, they become Aware of their entangled pairs position.

Now, I think there's a difference between Awareness and Consciousness. Awareness occurs on a subatomic level because there isn't a lack of information of position/momentum. On A Classical level, Awareness becomes Consciousness because there is a lack of information. This lack of information gives us the illusion of separation.

Well, how about this...

Consciousness doesn't exist as we define it. It's nothing more than a complex illusion. We act and react to external/internal stimuli and these interactions give rise to this illusion of one being conscious. If we program an advance AI that acts in a similar manner, passes all consciousness tests, then is it really conscious or is it just really good programming that gave rise to the illusion of it being conscious?

reply to post by sirnex



Do you see your self as no more than a machine? Made of matter and nothing more?
Have you ever seen someone you know after they have died?
What was missing?
I would be interested to see a consciousness measuring device.
Quote:
If we program an advance AI that acts in a similar manner, passes all consciousness tests, then is it really conscious or is it just really good programming that gave rise to the illusion of it being conscious? End quote.
I'm sorry but really???

If i could go to mars and back in one day do you think i'd be back in time for lunch?

reply to post by Itisnowagain

I'm sorry but really???

Yes, really.

If you can't prove to me that consciousness is a real phenomena that exists of it's own accord, then how can you prove anything is really conscious at all and is not simply an illusion? It's a valid question with very real implications.

You claim to be a conscious entity. I have no reason to believe that claim if you can't prove that claim. So what exactly is consciousness?

reply to post by sirnex


This is actually one of the first steps to understanding the nature of consciousness.

It can never be proven scientifically to exist.

You can never prove another entity has consciousness to yourself.

And you can never prove to another entity that you have consciousness.

It is fundamentally abstract.

Originally posted by Jezus
reply to post by sirnex

 

This is actually one of the first steps to understanding the nature of consciousness.

It can never be proven scientifically to exist.

You can never prove another entity has consciousness to yourself.

And you can never prove to another entity that you have consciousness.

It is fundamentally abstract.

How would you prove to yourself you are a conscious entity?

if I understand what your implying correctly it would seem to agree with these, no?

For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.
James4

hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are
1Corinthian1

Who spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds
Hebrews1

reply to post by sirnex

There are many in the scientific community who do ask this, do research this and do attempt to prove this. The issue here is, they fail to prove it.

science works with falsifaction, nothing is ever proved. there is mounting evidence to suggest that we the observer at the very least cocreate the universe arond us. this in its self breaks down are philosphy of science, which relies on a seperation of the subject and object.
i would not rely on science to explain what you already experience, conscious creation. the one thing you know to exist for sure,because you experience it is your consciousnes. The one thing science canot prove to exist is Consciousnes.
how can you answer such a question with science. if science cannot prove consciousnes exists. nor is consciousness a Quantum Entity. it would be more correct to say a quantum entity is Consciousness.
In my reality and remember that reality is relative everything is an epiphonema of consciousness.
The universe is a mirror...

kx

reply to post by sirnex


My own existence is consciousness.

The tough part is proving that you are anything but consciousness.