i mean, sure, could be, wabbit. that is not only a proposition that you do not have evidence for but a proposition that you cannot have evidence for, but go off
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @chaosprime
not sure about that, at least, it seems interesting enough to try to reformulate it into something testable and falsifiable. For one, it would be interesting to explicate "point of awareness" ^______^
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @0K_ultra
it's just going to annoy you basically, given that we have an experiential point of view, a consciousness, and that that consciousness is manifestly and demonstrably being fed a heavily falsified experience, including the experience of making choices, we can make some guesses
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
one is that whatever is going on with that point of awareness, whose existence makes no sense, everything it experiences is completely conditioned by the material circumstances it finds itself in. so if it is somehow apart from those, it doesn't carry around stuff from them
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
now, if you had one of those, an experiential point of view that just experiences whatever happens in physicality without any continuity beyond what physicality contains, and you were atemporal, you wouldn't actually need more than one. which has a certain resonance to it
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
but the lack of continuity in this proposition in itself defeats testability, so, y'know, oops
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
what's odd, though, is that this point of awareness does not appear to actually be strictly passive, or i wouldn't be able to speak of having one. there's a hypothesis that explains this that amuses me so greatly that i experience it as very likely
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
this is that the point of awareness is actually strictly passive, but the meat is right *by accident* about its existence, because having that sort of thing as an organizing driver has evolutionary advantages. and possibly being right by accident about them attracts them, idfk
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
i just really adore the idea that the one thing we can actually know about anything, that we are having experiences, fails the test of justified true belief because we're right about it for the wrong reasons
2 replies 2 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
Are you willing to elaborate on what you mean by "falsified experience"?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
roughly this kind of thinghttps://www.consciousentities.com/tag/blind-brain-theory/ …
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime @0K_ultra
So what you're seeing is a hallucination even when you're not, medically speaking, hallucinating?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
yeah i don't get as agitated about it as Bakker does (or used to), i just see it as a "dashboard view" kind of thing, but the experience our consciousnesses get fed is clearly very much an executive summary sort of thing
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like - 10 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.