Seems more like behaviorist reactions.

I'd contend that conscious experience is essential for open ended learning and dealing with novel situations. If you do not first have the qualia of the red fruit and the feeling of its sweetness, how do you make the association between the two under certain attention/value or reward schema. Behaviour that is reflexive and that which is not contextualized by other factors (which we do not have a priori knowledge of, as we learn and associate on the go) is not adaptive. Hence the unified rich inner experience. Eg. the weighting for seeking of a sweet reward in the form of a ripe fruit may be influenced by the presence of competitors - this association is not automatic but is drawn from past conscious experience. Consciousness is the medium for such associative learning and top down control of attention. Many of our actions are pre-conscious and only later are we made aware of them as the brain stitches up our conscious experience and ascribes our will to them after the fact.

@@sharif1306 An association between an image of red fruit, the sugar content of that fruit, and reward doesn't need to be conscious to exist. There is no reason why a behaviour that is contextualised by many factors requires a conscious experience. Also, there is no reason memory needs to be conscious (eg. Computers can memorise information without consciousness). If our consciousness only is aware of decisions after the fact, there is even more reason to believe it isn't required for complex learning.

@@martineyles If you had no inner experience i.e. if it were dark inside, how would you know what things relate to what others and how? How does the reflexive loop between stimuli, memory and action come about? How likely is such a fully formed repertoire of behaviors to emerge - for a wide variety of unforeseen circumstances - to be then selected for? If you were a mere jellyfish or amoeba it would be plausible to navigate your environment by merely tracking nutrient gradients and avoiding stressors and for these behaviors to be hardcoded. But for complex beings such as ourselves and other mammals occupying a cognitively demanding niche we need an inner 'self' that does the knowing and that can call upon general purpose System 2 reasoning and planning skills that are products of natural selection. So a conscious experience is evolution's shortcut to higher levels of cognitive control and flexibility.

@@sharif1306 on a fundamental level, a neural network based AI is little more than an formula which can adjust its weights and biases in order to better produce a desired result. Despite its simplicity, it is clearly capable of high levels of cognitive flexibility. So how could something as strange and seemingly complex as consciousness arise as a shortcut to a result which can clearly be accomplished through much simpler means?

Shellfish

Self on a shelf.

Where can i find it??😱

it does

this is bullshit. There are electronic replicatiors of sense organs, you still would not call those contious. And if a human loses its sense of smell u would not call it less countious. Ur idiotic distinction of countiousness is of the past and not helpful. I think the only thing you mean is a algorythm that manages other algorythms a neuronal deep reenforcement network that starts to collect and act upon statistics and other stuff of other deep neuronal network specialized for other stuff i would guess. Its like the definition of "spiritual/soul" noone can relly describe what they mean exept with descriptions that are not consistant or have as many "?" as the original term.

I am therefore I feel

@@sherrysyed -Subconsciousness

@@Y0NI nice 1

I think therefore I am would be the proper quote, although I think it works okay this way. A new question arises, though. Where is the separation of thought and sense?

Not enough to imagine. You need to build it to prove it. 😅

@@sharif1306 even if you built one, that would prove nothing as you cannot prove that anything is or isn't conscious, so that's a moot point.

@@alkeryn1700 so your earlier argument is invalidated as you cannot categorically say that such a rich repertoire of behaviors could appear in an organism without consciousness first having emerged. If you believe we are automatons designed by a creator that could be plausible but we are products of evolution. Also I could very well build an artefact with an inner VR experience consisting of audio video multi modal representations. This would be it's sort of subjective experience we would have access to. Indeed this is a key area of focus in generative AI research.

@@sharif1306 oh yes i could categorically say that, also i never mentioned a creator or whatnot... Also just because of evolution the notion that you perceive truth is just wrong because with natural selection organism that see truth will always disappear and get replaced by organism that are more fit. Because of evolution theory, an organism will never evolve to see a truthful representation of its reality.

@@alkeryn1700 still think there's no utility to the inner experience? Spend a day with your eyes closed. Just cause you say so doesn't make it true or remotely plausible. Never said evolution always shows truth as evidenced by various optical illusions but only that which increases fitness. But to think it has no correlation or grounding in reality would be stupid.

Really interesting tibbits in this vid but no real message, and I agree about the plants and insects thing

You don't need consciousness to react to external stimuli.

They didn't claim that the flowers/plants are conscious but that the insects that recognize and attend to them that are conscious. As for the Cambrian explosion - it came more than a billion years after the eukaryotes emerged. Likely reason for this delay - there wasn't sufficient oxygen in the atmosphere to support complex animals with active lifestyles. A few hundred millions after the first photosynthesis and chloroplasts there was enough oxygen in the atmosphere to support them.

and/or its used to deduce from 2 unrelated infos to a 3rd and so on. Seems just like a network that works with the infos of other networks instead of only external stimuly. Maybe even to plan where/how the algorythm wants to develop based on the new environment and past exp. Who knows maybe the term is not even coherant.

rhythm induction in the temporal domain and octave equivalence in the spatial domain. References?

@@sharif1306 Just resolve the octave equivalence paradox; factors of two are the simplest-possible frequency relationships in either domain; since in the spatial domain a factor of one is just a unison (ie. a harmonic interval of 'zero'), and in the temporal domain just a pulse or beat, 'rhythm', as harmony, involves a relationship between two or more freqs. By default, then, all information we process is spatiotemporal modulation of factor of two symmetries; since ie. harmonic consonance is maximal at this minimal freq ratio, what we're actually referring to _by_ the term 'harmonic consonance' reduces to this ineffable perception of 'equivalence' or parity arising at all factors of two of any arbitrary reference freq; as we increment the integer factors we climb up the harmonic series, so all factors of three are perfect fifths, factors of four octaves again, factors of five produce thirds, of six, fourths and so on through the series, 'dissonance' thus reducing to degrees of 'inequivalence', or 'difference' in the Shannon sense. Octave equivalence is thus reading 'zero difference' in terms of meta-information - the 'paradox' being that it is dependent upon this very specific, empirical difference. What is increasing with integer factors is the size of the smallest temporal integration windows freq relationships resolve to, thus representing a convergent axis between informational and thermodynamic entropies. So even when not listening to music, all freq relationships in the ambient audio field are still being processed the same way - inevitably resolving freq components from multiple sources that just happen to align to whatever integer factors. Information that resolves within a given temporal integration window is 'spatial domain', and information spanning multiple TIW's is 'temporal'; all animals thus divine space from time on the fly as a function of their respective critical flicker freqs, mass / radiative surface area, refractory periods of sensory and processing nuclei and metabolic rates etc. - across the board, brains substantiate, enumerate, resolve and reproduce meta-information (information _about_ information) in terms of entropic signatures directly relating to the energy cost of processing. Octave bandwidths - in space _and time_ - are thus the 'groove' that consciousness rides in, the 'needle on the record' the instantaneous solutions being resolved in the executive temporal integration window, or conscious 'now'.

@@MrVibrating One day I may fully grasp your answer but it is not today. Are these your original thoughts? The information theoretic entropy reduction with regard to beliefs about the external milieu is a crucial aspect of Karl Friston's Free Energy Principle. Maybe your resolution of the octave equivalence paradox is some empirical evidence towards it.

@@sharif1306 I'm unfamiliar with Friston's work; my own theoretical solutions to over-unity exploit the fine-print in the time-conservation of momentum to produce divergent inertial frames wherein net system velocity can be doubled by merely doubling the input work done, whilst net KE in the ground frame _squares.._ But FWIW and quite incidently, i just expanded somewhat on the above topic in response to an old 'Zombie Dave' interview here: /watch?v=xy2vzhwdkpM

😐

To protect the innocent...LOL

it's a secret message for other masons

What was the reason for the white eyes on all creatures?

Failed attempt at humor... a higher form of consciousness.

so its less boring/more engaging so you squeeze out some neuromodulatos and encode this info better, the decition was made by inuition of the person making this segment ask his dna

indeed

Scientism as opposed to ignorantism? 🤔

An attempt at humor, a higher form of consciousness.

to squeze out more chemicals to make you remember/engage with this information. Its like when a teacher uses a voice that is not monotone or shows you a cool experiment. It helps you to consolidate information since your brain might be persuaded to allow some more cells to adapt since it thinks this information might fit in your "plan"

And he said what?

consciousness is stoned

Stone did become alive 😅. Life emerged from the interaction of olivine and such minerals in hydrothermal vents with acidic ocean water.

@@sharif1306 jokes apart, with what experience or feeling your saying it emerged out of stone? For you to feel experience and say it you must have consciousness Hence, by our own experience it's consciousness the ground on basis of which we're understanding and experiencing the world So in literal sense, No you can't prove consciousness to be later emergence compared to stones lol

@@Infiniteemptiness that's a logical fallacy. Consciousness allows you to make sense of the world doesn't mean it precedes all existence. When you die or go to sleep the world doesn't cease to exist. There is an objective reality independent of your subjective experience. As for understanding origin of life look into the work of Nick Lane.

@@sharif1306 Yes I'm not saying it's wrong, all I'm saying is you can't prove it, because objective reality is also subjective Once you die no way of proving whether world is or not As life we're limited by consciousness, in consciousness and we can't go out and verify without it

People with lisps are unlikely to change their physiology to suit you. Your intolerance is a personal problem that you are just going to have to manage yourself.

@@daniellamcgee4251 - It's NOT a physiological problem; it's an acquired habit in UK speech practiced by some, and is voluntary for the most part. It's akin to the baffling preference of substituting "W"s for "L"s, which some Brits also do. To other English-speaking ears, it comes off sounding like baby talk.

​@@daveogarf i have a lisp and i'm definitely not 'practicing' anything.

@@daveogarf Language is a combination of physiology and environment. We hear and learn. A young adult in my family has a lisp, says 'l's at the end of words as 'w's (reverse of what you have heard) and 'r's as 'w's . He has dypraxia; co-ordination disorder which is obviously physiological. He would not be the only one. Also, people with poor hearing may develop anomalies in speech. If it's common, not just individuals, it's probably a dialect, and is learned from hearing language. A relatively small percentage of people cultivate an accent and keep it as their permanent speaking voice. Whatever way, they aren't going to change their speech for you. It might help to figure out exactly what annoys you so much.

sound engineer using a multiband limiter. a lot of people don't notice it and think the sound all great because the compression is so amazing.

Doesn't it? I think you are imposing unrealistic limits.

@@lagreen2122 Consciousness is like light, mind evolves. And the spectrum of perception widens.

And that is because your neuronal network (the squishy stuff in your skull that is very dense and extremly complex and super small so you can only see some strange stuff) changes. Dont act like u understand biologiy noone has solved it perfectly without any questions. There are many things to be solved, we can just say its extremly resonable to say that it is very complex since its so super small and what it can do suggests that it is a system with many unsolved myserys, that does not mean you can narrow it in and we know a lot lot lot Your light whatever is just blabla you dont know anything you are just using your intuition. But that does not mean you cant keep going who knows maybe its helpful. And noone benefits if you feel bad, friend.

@@hanskraut2018 🙄😑 chill man, I was just trying to explain it from a philosophical standpoint. I don't think science will ever be able to solve the 'hard problem of consciousness'. And there's significant reason to why some people think this. Some things are weird, like observer effect. Bdw tell me what do you think conciousness is? I would really like to know thought on this.

If our perception of time is stitched together from disparate parts (color, movement and form perception and later on the brain fills in the form with color and movement) then perhaps consciousness is also stitched together in a similar way. This of course would make consciousness somewhat of an illusion since a car is not technically a car if each individual parts (the wheels, the windows, the motor etc) are viewed separately and also altogether as one at the same time.