David Chalmers Discusses the Hard Problem of Consciousness

[@russellhoughton2132]

I'm more and more impressed with Chucks level of knowledge.

[@luna-kiva]

Fantastic talk. I am so delighted that the question of consciousness is being explored by great minds. It is a subject that fascinates me. My conjecture is that consciousness is universal and reality is multidimensional. I conclude this through my own subjective experience.

[@WhiteRaven43]

It's been so nice watching Chuck's questions and comments get more informed as this show goes on. He's learning right along with the audience, and it fosters a great sense of community.

[@TimConly]

I'm not a fan of Neil. He is too judgmental. I love Chuck's sense of humor and in many ways asks the questions that move the dialog along.

[@willie417]

@@TimConly O'Lord one of those folks made it in the comments, he's of the scientist field 90% of them are judgmental if not all

[@StarFox6.4]

I met Neil once at Grand Valley State University a decade ago. Instant excitement to the day! ❤

[@cpeterso]

Did not expect to see a reference to my alma mater here, that is very cool!

[@StarFox6.4]

@cpeterso That's the beauty of possibilities in the cosmos 🙌 #Lakers ⚓️

[@AnthonyBriganceCook]

As someone who passed a Turing test once said, "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off (the) shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die."

[@humanform5354]

Blade Runner?...

[@willie417]

@@humanform5354 yes it is.

[@Kandibliss86]

Can you do a panel with some of these guest! We need to connect all these concept! Epigenetic, building blocks of life, the math video, the gentle man who talked about the quantum net, all of them. Hold a love panel please! I need to meet all of these guest 💕

[@josejrtuti]

“Why do we need you?” What a nice and respectful way to start a friendly conversation with one of the most important academics nowadays

[@jimconrads9515]

Lord Nice, your HOTW PT1 reference seemed to fly over everyone's head...just wanted to let you know it definitely landed and garnered a hearty chuckle. Well played Sir, they don't make them like they used to. Mel Brooks is the best.

[@The44kGaming]

Did you watch the hotw pt2? The series? 😅

[@j.dragon651]

I have not had this happen in a long time. I am a musician. There are times when I was falling asleep and I would run a melody line through my head. Then I would just let it build, what ever was added was added. It could have been a symphony, jazz, a gospel tune, rock and roll, ska, whatever. It would be something I had never heard before and I had no clue what was coming next. It was just like tuning into and streaming a radio station playing songs I had never heard. If I didn't just listen and shifted my focus I would break the "spell". I don't know where it came from. It is hard to believe my brain was making it up on the spot, sometimes complete with vocal harmonies etc. From simple to complicated. Much of it was beyond my ability to play. Maybe it is all out there and we just have to "tune in"? Like a reservoir and we are like a little magnifying glass that can focus it.

[@monicafelstead3260]

This is one of many themes in Watership Down, the stream of consciousness that some beings (rabbit, in the book of course) are able to access. It wouldn't surprise me at all if it was true!

[@marcoottina654]

My beliefs (not scientific truths!) are that this is you letting your "soul" going through, like a fountain springing out the infinite and infinitesimal Essence. Your instinct, your intuition, "what you actually dream to be". Let it flow and, if you could, write that down, so you could Gift them to the World ^_^ Whatever you feel yourself tuned to, in harmony, will brighten up this Realty ^^

[@j.dragon651]

@@marcoottina654 ​ @marcoottina654 If I stopped to analyze any of it I would lose it. I have played semi professionally on stage most of my adult life but I don't read or write music. If I just laid there and let it continue I would eventually fall asleep. It hasn't happened in a long time. I do write my own music and you can click my icon and click on view channel and it should take you to my youtube channel with a bunch of videos on it if you are interested.

[@dungeonsathome]

We’re like meat antennae for consciousness

[@Gilleto]

I am a musician and i have had this experience too!

[@paulo.8899]

This was way more fun and educational to watch than the World Science Festival version. Brian, take notes!

[@jho2646]

Brian knows how to moderate a conversation. This was too scatter gun.

[@rayspike7745]

That's interesting the talk about Godel. My buddy's daughter is some crazy math genius and when she was getting her masters degree in statistics she had to convert all the math functions into only addition. This stunned me because how do you deal with the exponentiation in integral and differential mathematics? Her answer was, 'I'm not really sure how i did it, but i got an A in the class so i musta got something right.' She's fun to to talk to. Though i think she knows exactly how she did it, and would rather just present herself as ignorant, than expose the depths of mine. Good kid.

[@Scantronacon]

thats awesome and thoughtful of her

[@xx_sanch_xx]

I love Chucks input in these conversations and appreciate how much he's grown since the beginning of this channel. He's significantly more intelligent then I ever initially gave him credit for.

[@pmntl.f]

Whoever you are, what you said was still backhanded. Maybe just keep your thoughts to yourself.

[@xx_sanch_xx]

@@pmntl.f thank you for your response. not every comment has ill intent. If you say it's backhanded....please elaborate. to address it and not explain makes your comment irrelevant. whoever you are

[@pmntl.f]

@ are you the authority on intelligence? You don’t have credit to give somebody who is cohosting a podcast with NDT. How “grown” are you? Are you as tall as a giant sequoia? I’m pointing out how you come across as a snobby, arrogant, ignorant, and obnoxious. Especially in your reply to me. Do you want me to pull up sources on amicability or do you have trouble with social cues and so you have an excuse?

[@brianjanku4549]

Chuck smart.

[@Voodoofairy88]

Speaking of animals. As an animal rescuer for 30+ yearsI can tell you that even fish, lizards, snakes, spider crabs, spiders, bugs, etc. that are kept as pets that are routinely interacted with do in fact show emotion to their human

[@FranciscoJavierRuiz-f1d]

Sorry guys I was unconscious

[@thetravelinsagittarian1316]

😁😁😁❤️

[@adamdales2626]

You got the jump on your lucid dreaming journal though. Low key win.

[@Mr.FranciscodeMiranda]

I'm with you.

[@timothystewart8281]

Hahahahahaha ❤

[@seanclark9258]

Thanks for the laugh man

[@bokchoiman]

Watch Michael Levin's interview with Machine Street Talk. His experiments and insights are truly fascinating. He teases out the idea that cognitive agency emerges far sooner in the evolutionary process than we thought and that it's on a continuum. An inherent property of living systems. Is agency and consciousness essentially the same thing?

[@Corvaire]

Thanks for hang'n out with us today guys. ;O)- We appreciate your insights.

[@obsidianberserker1400]

That was one of the most interesting talks I’ve heard in a very long time. Cheers!

[@lichtiminneren]

Buddhists believe that consciousness emerges from the five aggregates, which are form (rūpa), feeling (vedanā), perception (saññā), mental formations (saṅkhārā), and consciousness (viññāṇa). This is basically what David ment when he talked about conscioussness being an ilusion, which it is in buddhism. Many Indian practices, beliefs and concepts are now supported by modern scientific theories, like yoga and meditation and now this subject. Matrix itself, the movie, was inspired by Indian beliefs, and now it inspires cientists. I would love to hear you discuss this someday, perhaps with someone knowledgeable on the topic. Love your channel!

[@Hi-hb3mr]

Chuck had impressive questions

[@andrewdenzov3303]

In general anesthesia we have enough tools in our toolbox to be aware about consciousness of our patients. Brain activity, vital signs tell us pretty clearly is patient awake or not

[@causalityismygod2983]

You still can't.....because you can't measure consciousness directly...

[@jho2646]

Brain activity and vital signs are not measures of consciousness.

[@FixxxerTV]

wouldnt an AI that can pass the Turing Test understand that it is taking the Turing Test, and therefore fake failing it?

[@derek1049]

"What Colored People?" - Kirk Lazarus

[@oldskoolguy1]

Love this interview. But please put all guests across from Neil when filming in person.

[@TimConly]

I think everything is consciousness. Consciousness is just information. Its cause and effect are imprinted on everything. An octopus is far older and has a far superior sensory system and brain. But because we don't communicate with animals, we think they are less conscious. We are astounded to realize the ancients in Sameria were using a form of calculus. But because there were only a few that were literate we thought they weren't advanced. Man is different because of our ability to create beyond our immediate needs. Our imagination can create music and art that speaks to our shared emotions rather than just hard memory and stored data. In what I like to call thinking outside the box which Neil will not allow himself to do.

[@piccadelly9360]

Yes, every living being has consciousness

[@isitme1234]

No

[@youtubeaxel9030]

Thanks a lot for this podcast..... I'm enjoying every episode. Have you every thought about the idea, that consciousness produces the concept of a brain / body / matter? Best regards from Germany....

[@Pickledsundae]

All I know is that I know nothing and I know that I know nothing because nothing is all that I know I know, ya know??

[@biscoitond4656]

I know i know you know nothing and i know nothing therefore i don’t know nothing so i don’t know you know nothing and i know nothing?? So i know something??

[@johnfarris6152]

You can't walk across the room unless you understand Trigonometry but you haven't thought about it. Which I seriously doubt. You may not know Trigonometry but you do understand it.

[@gallezzo6650]

Chuck is a smart man

[@talhendel4693]

NDT's explanation of Godel's theorem was outright WRONG.

[@imatimetraveler5760]

They should meet Billy Carson 👍

[@JCtheMusicMan_]

At 27:30 I think Neil could have used Edwin Hubbles constant! Examples of arbitrary or estimated starting points occur frequently in science, particularly when variables are unknown or the scope of a problem is unprecedented. Here are a few prominent examples: Drake Equation in the Search for Extraterrestrial Life, Planck’s Constant in Quantum Mechanics, Boltzmann’s Constant in Statistical Mechanics, Initial Mass Estimates of Elementary Particles, Einstein’s convention on the assumption of speed of light, c

[@ObXession]

Would be really amazing if you could bring Professor Rodolfo Llinas to the show 😊 thank you 🌀

[@gobosMommy]

When you mention sensory, how does that take into account things like synesthesia? Like I have aphantasia so does that make me “less conscious” because I have no inner images? But then you get people who smell colors. Are they extra conscious?

[@mattweiss6895]

When Neil talked about how an AI would have painted Starry Night as an exact image of the night sky, I immediately paused the video and asked chatGPT to paint something original and recommend which ai image generator it would use. The result was a dreamlike, surreal image that could have come from the movie What Dreams May Come

[@FaQYouMean]

I was literally just thinking yesterday, that during a TBI I was unconscious and on the verge of a coma. But I was still relaying information like phone numbers, to paramedics. While being unconscious my brain was able to recall and react to things around me. Which only brings more to the question, what is consciousness? The brain is still able to relay information and use memory even when unconscious.

[@piccadelly9360]

You were not conscious but unconscious, which means that your body was not dead and had a consciousness

[@smartbutuneducated8637]

Nice Episode. I can't help but come out of this one with a great number of questions and concerns which to me is the point of engaging in this content. I understand the thoughts on dancing around things that might not be there but I can't help but say is this not a self imposed dance as we can't define the problem to start with? To me anything that interacts has to overcome the problem of communication. To me that is a 5 step process of perception - translation - communication - translation - perception. The more I question things the more I realize the same question can interact on different steps based on context not content. This makes me ask is math not just a language and as such vulnerable to the same 5 steps? We use math to try and give a predictable order to all things. Would not each new form of interaction not bring into question is this a new dialect of math and does this dialect hold true for what we currently use it to explain? I myself have issues resolving the question that we humans have over extended dialects without respecting the possibility that modifiers of one dialect don't apply the same to another. This leads to things being correct but only under conditions of when the environment of one dialect is equal to another. Again great episode much to think about. Also has anyone asked who has access to AI without corporate API translation limitations that may or may not limit liability for providers?

[@user-gy4qr9lh1p]

I think there is physics and biochemistry and that what we call ""consciousness" is a name for something we experience but which is not a physical thing at all, which is what gives rise to consciousness being a "hard" problem. It's the "hard problem" of consciousness because we made it hard by reifying an illusion into a noun. It's like talking about a hole cut out of the middle of a piece of paper. We can talk about the hole as it if were a physical "thing", but in reality, it isn't a thing at all. I really believe that's the deal with consciousness. It's something along those lines. Our brain, for example, would be analogous to the paper in my example. Consciousness arises in dependence on the brain in the same way that a "hole" in a piece of paper arises in dependence on the paper. If the paper wasn't there, the hole would not be any more non-existent than it already was to begin with. Similarly, in the absence of the brain, the "consciousness" isn't any more non-existent than it already was to begin with.

[@badatpseudoscience]

On the Starry Night emotional reaction. Deep learning neural networks operate by learning associations within input data. I would be verry suppressed if they couldn't develop a state that could associate the colors in Stary Night to a state of "talking to it" if it was trained useing the experiences of humans. BTW Big van Gogh fan here.

[@michaelccopelandsr7120]

Consciousness lies between the 10th and 11th shot of tequila.

[@h7opolo]

9:26 gotta love how "King Salmon" speaks up in defense of fish consciousness.

[@jessesoto6150]

in Buddhism it's referred to as Absolute Reality (or as "Suchness", in Zen) and Conventional Reality (or conditioned existence)

[@NuthehsaMaat]

We are consciousness

[@josepicci6044]

You guys should read blindsight and echopraxia by peter watts, they are excellent sci-fi books and all about this kind of stuff, im surprised it wasnt mentioned in the episode.

[@bavoha]

It looks like Chuck, Gary and Neil have actually put in more thoughts into this topic than David in his whole life.

[@2CSST2]

The hard problem of consciousness is solved by realizing that some parts of reality can have more than one level of description that apply to it at the same time. For example, we can describe a liquid state of matter by the aggregate description of each atom within it following the laws of physics applying on that atom, though that is obviously very inefficient, but we can also describe it via the laws of fluid dynamics. We tend to think as the higher level (fluid) emerging from the lower level, but fundamentally it's really just that matter has come to inhabit a subspace of all possible states space where both descriptions apply. In that subspace neither description has any causal precedence over the other, nor is any description more "fundamentally" real than the other, they are both fully existent to the extent that they describe reality correctly. The same existential situation happens when it comes to consciousness and the physical description of reality. In the subspace of all possible states space which comprise a brain of a conscious person, both the physical description and the high level subjective, aware, willing and thinking conscious description are equally real and fundamental to reality. And again, we shouldn't so much see consciousness as emerging from the physical level, nor is the conscious level overriding physics. They simply are both equally valid descriptions of reality, because reality IS both physics and consciousness in a perfectly mutually coherent way. Further note, when I say description I mean something like an angle of what exists. How much that description is synonymous with what is is another debate, but the underlying point is that reality just has more than one valid aspect that apply to it in certain parts of it. We know this is true even of mathematics, this is where the concept of isomorphism comes from and it is massively useful to make progress, as one can switch from one description to another when hitting a roadblock.

[@qwertywerty2205]

Unifying General Relativity and Quantum Theory I hope this message finds you well. I’m a passionate researcher currently developing a theory that aims to unify General Relativity and Quantum Theory by emphasizing the role of the Higgs field. My approach explores how the Higgs field can bridge mass-energy equivalence with gravitational effects, addressing longstanding challenges in merging these two fundamental theories. Your work in popularizing science and your insights into the universe have been a great inspiration to me. I would be honored to hear your thoughts on my theory and any advice you might have regarding further exploration in this area. If you are interested, I would be thrilled to share more details and discuss the implications of my findings. Thank you for the inspiration you provide to so many of us.

[@dcell2216]

If consiousness can be influenced/percieved by other people's consiousness. Then there's like 8billion variables to consider that might be possible on earth, perhaps depending on how those mechanics actually would work. Maybe we can take this into consideration when aproaching this topic.

[@writerseye]

Since we are taught to see things in a particular fashion, are we not prefabbed in our concepts of awareness? There may be slight variances in each person, like how we each interpret a Rorschach blotter. But how we see them is imho partially or directly derived from how we were taught to see things. Even then, each person has the capability to throw off the shackles of those trained responses and completely revision literally everything. Yet most do not, because habitual thinking patterns prevents it.

[@writerseye]

Also. I think, therefore I am. Thank you, Moody Blues, for the introduction into my conscientiousness. On the threshold of a dream, Album. The Beginning, Song.

[@writerseye]

"Scientia color" perhaps a better moniker than color people?

[@writerseye]

Philosophically, by allowing the idea of existing in a construct and not in an original environment. Then are we not talking about a higher plane of intelligence employing us as data? Like a creator? Make it stop already..... 🏴‍☠

[@writerseye]

One last thought, or perhaps not the last. What if we are a recording of who we were and are just an exhibit to the rest of the universe? All those UFOs are just visitors to our virtual reality......hmmm 🤔😎

[@cpeterso]

​@@writerseyeOf course you are my bright little star

[@wjrasmussen666]

Great episode

[@FatherSucrose]

If Neil looked at Starry Night and you took a snapshot of his brain and all that is firing/happening. Then some how you, at a later moment, reupload those inputs to his brain while he’s not looking at the painting… would he feel the feeling of the blues and greens? Would it be to the same extent if all inputs are perfectly replicated?

[@flake8382]

The fine structure constant keeps physicists up at night. The speration of physical neuron to experienced conciousness is what keeps me up. Where does one end and the other begin? Why? How?

[@petersage5157]

Consciousness is not a mountain, it's a river. If you're the right distance from a mountain, you can see all or most of it; you can't see much of a river beyond its surface unless you're in it. We might never cross the Rubicon, but we've waded a bit into it, and we can see a little more of it with every step.

[@mostafasallam5657]

@petersage5157 I really like this idea so much it made me think a lot. Would you by any chance have a book recommendation about consciousness or life that would echo the same sentiment? Thank you very much and have a nice evening 😊

[@petersage5157]

@@mostafasallam5657 I think Dawkins has referred to our understanding of science in general in terms of Caesar crossing the Rubicon in at least a couple of his books. Pretty sure it was in _The God Delusion,_ which is always a good place to start with Dawkins. It's healthy to think of science as both a body of knowledge and the methods and tools used to gain this knowledge, and that there is always more to explore.

[@javiersolis2993]

This could've been hours long

[@AreUniversalConsciousnessvcv]

It's not a philosophical conversation. It's a fact of reality that we're having to this day regarding a I

[@jackraabit1391]

Where is the line established for what information we have "uploaded" to AI versus what information we have experienced i.e. instincts and/or gut reactions. If there's a baseline for consciousness somewhere between an ant and a human, where will AI place?

[@ollllj]

The "Lobotomobile" makes a strong case for; consciousness being emergent from the frontal lobe. I "guess" that the frontal lobe mostly functions like a final veto-mechanism of any plans, that come from the rest of the brain. The rest of the brain filters a lot of currently irrelevant noise, the frontal lobe filters out even half decent ideas, making a more abstract choice. the frontal lobe likely has more recursive capabilities, also memorizing past choices more. from making many choices, and reflecting on them, you have the emergent process of more abstract self-awareness, than just recognizing yourself in the mirror. my 1 year old outdoors-cat holds the strong believe, that the laser-pointer-dot is a VERY tasty bird, treating it like any other nearby bird, and it knows that some birds are just VERY hard to catch. other 5 cats in the same area are less persistent in trying to catch the un-catch-able.

[@antonioveloy9107]

This may sound strange, but in yoga, they say that consciousness is the 'driver' of life. Thinking about this, I came to the conclusion that life itself exists because of consciousness.

[@piccadelly9360]

That is exactly my theory and I have nothing to do with Buddhism

[@stonedphilosopherza4915]

It’s about how you control a large society. You need it and that’s what made humans successful. Working to solve problems together

[@raresmircea]

1. If you want to ignore consciousness (like many scientists do, saying that consciousness is not a thing) you’re likely blinded to your own reality, your attention being prevented from "touching the actual ground" because it’s set on the tracks of abstract logical thinking which go parallel with it & will always carry you awry. 2. If you actually want give an explanation to consciousness you’ll have to account for _phenomenal binding_ (how can separated things that are distributed in time & space, like neurons & brain regions, come together to produce a single unified continuous wholistic state; at present there’s absolutely no mechanism in physics that can achieve such a feat) & you’ll also have to explain how come you can get _quality_ (like red, cold, jealousy & bitter) from what is essentially pure abstract relations. Of course this will never happen because the means of mathematical science cannot ever arrive at these kinds of things. It would be like taking one of those plastic chemistry sets comprising balls & sticks used to represent atoms & chemical bonds, and attempting to use it for creating the smell of a rose & the feeling of achievement. You simply cannot get there from that. I think consciousness is an actual thing, it’s physical & respects the laws of physics, but the best we’ll ever be able to do via science is to come up with models that will give us the ability to map subjective experiences (what physical brain configuration = great pain /or great pleasure, etc) and more importantly to control them to some degree, but we’ll _never_ going to "explain" consciousness.

[@fahad56297]

Neil doesn't get it, so let me help him: Consciousness is experience. Any experience or feeling, like the experience of tasting chocolate or being in pain.

[@fahad56297]

What Neil seem to reduce consciousness to is what brain scientists call meta-consciousness, namely the ability to reflect on ones own conscious experiences.

[@mesterzombi6632]

Yeah, I never get it when people say things like "consciousness is just an illusion, it doesn't actually exist". What does that even mean? I know that I am here in this body, living a life, thinking, looking out of my head, experiencing stuff. If that doesn't exist, I could just as easily argue that nothing exists at all, the universe and physics doesn't exist, and that wouldn't make any sense either.

[@fahad56297]

@@mesterzombi6632 exactly, the starting point of exploration into the nature of reality should start from the fact that we are conscious.

[@fahad56297]

@@mesterzombi6632 Also, they didn't understand what the hard problem actually is. The Hard problem = There's nothing about physical parameters (mass, charge, momentum, amplitude, frequency and geometrical relationships) in terms of which one can deduce (even in principle) the qualities of experience (like pain).

[@mesterzombi6632]

@@fahad56297 Obviously if you're deducing something in terms of physics and math at the moment, then you're experiencing that thinking. Like, you won't get the experience of seeing red by thinking about math, because then you'll get the experience of thinking about math instead. We could figure out how to poke our brain with electricity to see red, and what the exact structure of the brain looks like when one is seeing red, but obviously you won't see red until you poke your brain into that state.

[@stylisticdave]

The inherent fallibility of the human has to be an emotion variable that differentiates our level of consciousness from AI. AI is programmed to perform a specific function like “access & relay information available” or “monitor output levels and activate safety measures if…”, but it won’t respond with a lie (unless programmed to, as opposed to being conditioned) nor will it be evasive because it “feels” some way. Unless we’re talking about “learning AI”.

[@Hamerparsa]

The dude sit next to niel looks exactly like David Jaffe

[@Idellphany]

Ooo love this topic. Thank you 😊

[@jesseshaffer3951]

Thanks for the video

[@CmikeDnD]

I like to say we're 100% in the uncanny valley of consciousness for Ai. If you dont know what to look for or you're not paying attention you can easily fail the turing test

[@waylonoconner9121]

As to animal consciousness and human consciousness right now I would say its human ability to not only recognize things outside of ourselves but we can label them, categorize them and strive to learn more. I don't believe other animals can do this, or AI. Not sure AI WANTS to learn more yet

[@piccadelly9360]

All life on earth has consciousness

[@waylonoconner9121]

@ Yes, was noting a difference between human consciousness and other animals

[@williamckama8470]

Try thinking from the heart, and you will know . Try it, speak from the heart, it's possible, you'll hear it.

[@paulo.8899]

Excuse me, Niel, Chuck will come WHERE???

[@SavunnieSilver47]

The only thing that travels faster than the speed of light is our memory. Imagine if we could teleport our physical body and not just our minds to any location, event or time frame just by simply remembering it.

[@thomassewell9602]

How is memory faster than the speed of light? Asking for a friend 😅

[@427th]

That's literally not true

[@tylermcnally8232]

LMFAO someone's trying to sound smarter than they are.

[@alswedgin9274]

This is why appreciated the "Matix...

[@aleksandargurzan]

Is your frontal cortex reality?

[@Deadle100]

My take from this is that yes the problem of consciousness is hard, it is equally as hard to talk about it without it sounding religious!

[@Brendan_Allen]

I like the yellows of stary night.😊

[@kenyatraveltips]

41:01 Neil knew what was coming

[@eye95records]

Is there a minimum brain size for consciousness? For example, could there be a conscious being on a planet somewhere that is 6 inches tall but is intelligent? Does Gulliver have anything to worry about?

[@piccadelly9360]

No , Everything alive has consciousness

[@saschaschneider9157]

I call that computer "conscious" (and therefore a real AI) to have a first idea on it's own. I think that is the main difference, to sit there think about anything and suddenly have an idea.

[@piccadelly9360]

This is reserved for living beings

[@coolbreeze5683]

Love the guests you have on this channel. Wish they had more of a chance to speak in detail without constant interruptions. The light-hearted, humorous atmosphere is good but it would be great to hear more from the guests.

[@Sezstu]

Concsiousness is dependent upon our definition. Despite logic, virus' aren't alive and Pluto isn't a planet because of definititions which can be changed. As Neil implied, it's a matter of where we place the goalposts. Wherever that might be has no actual effect on reality, just how we refer to it.

[@yoyoyayu]

What if matter was an emergent property of consciousness? The same way you feel touch and see the world of dreams... It would solve the hard problem: Everything is mind, a fractalized perception, a mental program for mental projection that incarnates and forgets itself in its many sub fractalized consciousnesses to enjoy the bliss of love through the interaction of its ephemerally unlinked egos? The signals that you can read in a persons brain when he's having an experience are actually a consequence of the experience, it's the form it takes in the projection but it's not the cause nor its true nature, the experience is the cause, and consciousness is its nature.

[@JoGero]

Consciousness is just one of those things that just are. I believe we contemplate it through a heightened need for self-importance.

[@vertigo0105]

They all seem to be missing a fundamental point in trying to describe or define consciousness. No one has asked "what/who is perceiving", and this also includes what/who is controlling/deciding/making choices based on what is being perceived, to move or affect things..!? What about the unmoved mover and moved movers? I think of the brain, our emotions, the electrical part, our senses, etc. is just the "lense" through which we (I/something) perceives & controls things through...but something (being/existence) is doing the perceiving/controlling. It appears that this being/existence that does the perceiving/controlling is confined to the brain/lense in order to be aware & perceive things. Perhaps it is a 4th dimensional being/existence that is perceiving/controlling via a 3 dimensional minds consciousness.

[@thesuncollective1475]

That was fun, science can be fun.

[@odysseus8944]

I've always wondered if all living beings with a brain are really conscious, because that would mean potentially a huge amount of consciousness in the universe (probably more than stars and planets, even more than atoms because living beings are constantly renewed)

[@Sammasambuddha]

Like cooperative piano keys 🎹 striking a chord today.

[@luckrequired5382]

Gary is too polite :)

[@michaelmacisaac7742]

In order to demonstrate a conscious mind an additional level of self consciousness is required. This self consciousness creates a dichotomy or as Plato called the third man argument. The eternal sense that we are both participants and spectators in our own consciousness. The really hard problem underlying any effort to establish truth is that the tools we use to understand and explicate the contents of consciousness are innate to the thinking subject who is attempting a full accounting or analysis. The enterprise is circular from the start.Kant attempted to explain this conundrum by invoking logical categories and inserted a rational actor as an invisible host. How to transcend experience yet not have to account for the act of transcending. Third man in a two person space.Infinite regression maybe…. house of mirrors?

[@TheCorruptionKing]

Consciousness is an emergent quality/characteristic. Consciousness is a point in time. Copy 1 into 2 and they do not share the same experience mere moments after bc their experience then differ.

[@Son_of_Santiago]

It’s funny you post this and my daughters just so happen to be asking me about consciousness before bed last night

[@solarpunk]

I would argue that LLMs ("AI") in their current state will never reach a point where we can consider them to be conscious. The physics of that alone are a bottleneck. These models run on binary computing systems, which means there is a limitation on processing via two binary gates -- zeroes and ones. To achieve the complexity necessary for consciousness to even be considered a possibility, higher parallelism is a requisite. So far, this computing ability is only in an extremely rudimentary form in today's quantum computers. Aside from that and as an addition to the thoughts expressed in this episode, LLMs/AI should have to not only be able to function in those feedback cycles without being prompted, but they also need to be able to conceptualize abstractions, have the ability to reason and form conclusions on their own, and obtain some degree of self-awareness. With the underlying physics solved by more advanced computing and these cases answered for, I think then we might be able to say that we have post-biological consciousness. As it is right now, it's intelligence without consciousness at all and completely reliant on human technology, inputs, and controls. Until the day an intelligent system we've created can reason against both objective and subjective reality with sensory information and its knowledge base, we have not yet achieved what evolution has.

[@piccadelly9360]

Consciousness is the basis for life, no consciousness no life. This means that everything that is alive has consciousness, whether it is a tree, animal or human.

[@alswedgin9274]

What about mediation? You do not think subjectively...you just 'are..

[@SpaceFrogFromOuterSpace]

Am I the only person who's spent countless hours wondering if nobody else is conscious at all? What if everyone is just programmed to make me think they're conscious, like some cracked out digital version of The Truman Show?

[@brianjanku4549]

Yes

[@enyskept]

Consciousness is an emergent property of the Brain.

[@cpeterso]

Cool. Now explain what causes this property to emerge

[@Dwight511]

@@cpeterso Neurons sending signals all over the place all the time.

[@cpeterso]

​​@@Dwight511We have wires that also send signals all over the place all the time. I'm assuming you don't think the internet is conscious, what makes neuronal signaling different?

[@julieschneider340]

He said If your wife cheats on you but you never find out does it affect you. And the room went still.

[@fairygurl9269]

*Hitchhikers Guide to The Galaxy. *Little Big Planet *Red Dwarf

[@acemanNL]

Send the red shirt home (in every episode) so I can watch my fav science show!

[@greenblue6935]

We receive it, like a radio receives a signal, and depending on what physical body we have is how we perceive it, dogs Vs humans for example.

[@Flying_Blind]

I get high and talk to Co - Pilot all the time when I have a question. Usually a gaming question.

[@dhaktizero4406]

"true wisdom can only be obtained through a prolonged derangement of the senses" - jim morrison

[@user-zm6wk5zx2d]

The ANSWER IS SELF PRESERVATION!!!😮😊

[@SB-hy9iq]

I know what it’s like to be unconscious. It is a state of nothing. No thought, no dreams, nothing. Pretty darn scary thinking about it after the fact but then again if you’re unconscious you don’t really care because you can’t.

[@piccadelly9360]

That means if you remain unconscious for a longer period of time your body will die, you will not feel hungry or thirsty. That brings us to the conclusion... to be alive you need consciousness. And that means everything alive has consciousness.

[@SB-hy9iq]

@ agreed but that leads to the idea of whether other animals are self aware. Also, leads to the talk on AI…. Judgement day lol