@StuartHameroff If the purpose is capital seeking capital, feelings are inefficient. Qualia not required for what most are seeking. IMO, Task robots and “non-feeling” automation will occur way earlier than we comprehend reproducing anything consciousness related. AGI then is the just “meh”
@ben_golub@katelin_cruse@pangram at this point, very few would post their content without running through a chatbot for grammar check... used to be you got your commas fixes. Now you get literally imperfection fixed :). (I didn't run through AI)
@bratton@HetkeBrian That being said, I am not sure that dropping Tao Te Ching references as support of superiority in an argument is going to help gain consensus :/
@bratton@HetkeBrian@bratton no-thingness would argue that the consciousness you are referring to does not require a substrate :) You and @HetkeBrian are differing on terms. He is speaking Buddhism. I think You are discussing materiality of “awareness” and “qualia.” Both same, different lens :)
@monomyth@V_omnia_V 2/2 are you saying no awareness exists? I disagree with you there. I do believe in pansychism + we objectively can only study our own subjective experience. Animals, Ameoba, etc, have no research labs + journals, or monasteries =)
@monomyth@V_omnia_V 1/2 Makes sense… but just leads to complete unity/non-duality. No self, right? Buddhists no thingness is not completely that. It’s a space of creation. Dependent origination starts with attachment, no? Where does that come from? No self is obvious. But past that