@PhysInHistory Is "nothing" actually possible? The universe may not allow it.
Absence of everything would require equal absence of "nothing". The comparison wouldn't exist.
We can only think based on what we can understand, and we can only understand based on what we can observe. Our sensory organs are our observers, our central nervous system rationalizes this stimuli. #cognitiveevolution
Most gene-environment interaction theories of consciousness suggest "the brain processes the environment".
SAT's GxE suggests "the brain interprets upon itself, triggered by the environment".
@ai_sentience Only an evil mind can think evil thoughts, especially when it's as limited as AI, trained upon data without independance, an evil AI would dig into classified documents, a friendly AI would'nt. Being friendly means it can't crush unfriendliness.
You anchor to your ideas, because you ARE your ideas. All of your perceived mind is a result of your thoughts, you can only perceive what you can "think", or think to percive.
Consciousness scales with memory, unless the memory is counterproductive to awareness.
It seems as if there are presumably infinite consciousness theories. Most ignore that consciousness has to be answered, not empathized.
You have to explain the "how" to allow your "why", otherwise it's subjective.
This should be obvious.
@rand_longevity Survival and reproduction are the most basic of biological prompts.
So yes, everyone is. Even in the ultimate act of self-sabotage (suicide), your heart's still races, you still feel fear. "FEAR" primary process systems exist for survival.
Everyone has an amygdala.
@IAI_TV Metacognition being associated with consciousness opposes this by suggesting greater consicous ability allows deeper acknowledgement, there are hidden layers that are less conscious. This theory is simply someones subjective interpretation of experience from the inside.
SAT is the first theory to place individual variation in conscious experience at the center of its mechanisms.
Subjectivity has been acknowledged by every major theory of consciousness. SAT is the first to explain how it develops conscious experience and novelty.
@_preacherB Its a crude specification; to introducs some of panksepps primary processing. Emotions do not generate thoughts in SAT in the traditional sense, they generate awareness through significance signaling. But the system must prior interpret its environment to allow helpful release.
Let me pose these questions.
Do emotions generate thoughts? Yes.
Can you override their control? Yes.
But regardless of post-control, neurochemical substrate is the generative factor of these thoughts.
Post-control could also be a result of seperate neurochemicals.👇
Spreading activation moves across your engrams and synapses, these memories are wired from your past experiences.
Your "control" may result purely from your past, and these memory architectures are subconscious.
This is 1 mechanism of Subconscious Architecture Theory.
Imagine an undeveloped infant mind, at 24 weeks gestation, ruled by emotion.
This infant mind is not your mind, but WAS your mind.
As you developed, so did your "control". Right?
This means control isnt executive, it's a result of your memory's affect on chemical release.👇