Sartre: How,Do,We,Get from Nothingness to Freedom

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Who's this you?
Consciousness itself. The dominant thought is someone who usually gets their way, performing action in the physical realm.

Consciousness itself is what without a thought?

Who is this "someone"?

Robots can choose between three or more choices. Still makes them robots.

And what is bad about robots? As you appear to agree with me that when a robot can choose not to do or do something then it'll be conscious.

Never said a robot was bad. Don't know if it would be conscious or not. Humans are simple machines, but the average AI is less complex than the mind of an insect. Humans don't make choices, they are caused by the forces of nature to do certain things. Higher complexity humans seem to not be bound by the laws of instinct, that is, they seem to want more than just sex work and doctrine, but they are still bound to the laws of physics and nature. Everything they do is caused, it is no choice of their own, if it seems random that is because of the I(Intelligience) routines. It is only psuedo random like a computer random number. Even if it was truly random, it would still not be a choice, but random events. Just like the post I made now. I did not choose to, the inertia of nature chose for me. Even a god cannot choose their own actions, the very concept of choice has no basis in reality.

What is consciousness? An experience. One need not think to experience existence. Thoughts are just floaty clouds of data, nothing more.

[Breath]

Humans don't make choices, they are caused by the forces of nature to do certain things.

So you keep alleging, over and over, without a scerrick of evidence. Is it a law of physics that everything obeys the laws of physics?

Your unshakeable faith in what is nothing more than metaphysical claptrap is somewhere between slightly amusing and alarming.

Breath

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Humans don't make choices, they are caused by the forces of nature to do certain things.

So you keep alleging, over and over, without a scerrick of evidence. Is it a law of physics that everything obeys the laws of physics?

Your unshakeable faith in what is nothing more than metaphysical claptrap is somewhere between slightly amusing and alarming.

Breath

It's basic logic, nothing "claptrap" about it. To believe otherwise, would be to have faith in the absurd. I already explained in the previous paragraph how even gods cannot make choices, it's a logical impossibility on all levels. You have faith in logical impossibilities, you have faith in metaphysical claptrap, not I. You cannot prove me wrong on any level, and you didn't even bother trying.

[Arising_uk]

Never said a robot was bad. Don't know if it would be conscious or not. Humans are simple machines, ...

Not simple at all.

but the average AI is less complex than the mind of an insect. ...

The are no 'AI's', other than in computer games, average or not.

Humans don't make choices, they are caused by the forces of nature to do certain things. Higher complexity humans seem to not be bound by the laws of instinct, that is, they seem to want more than just sex work and doctrine, but they are still bound to the laws of physics and nature. Everything they do is caused, it is no choice of their own, if it seems random that is because of the I(Intelligience) routines. It is only psuedo random like a computer random number. Even if it was truly random, it would still not be a choice, but random events. Just like the post I made now. I did not choose to, the inertia of nature chose for me. Even a god cannot choose their own actions, the very concept of choice has no basis in reality.

And yet in computing we can have non-deterministc systems even tho' they have a clear pre-programmed goal?

What is consciousness? An experience. One need not think to experience existence. Thoughts are just floaty clouds of data, nothing more.

Given that I think experience is what you do with what happens to you I agree that what happens to you is being conscious but if by consciousness you mean self-awareness then I think thought much more than floaty clouds but I also have a difference between 'thoughting' and 'thinking' as the latter, for me, is what you do with language essentially and thoughting is what you do with the representations of reality that the senses provide.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Never said a robot was bad. Don't know if it would be conscious or not. Humans are simple machines, ...

Not simple at all.

but the average AI is less complex than the mind of an insect. ...

The are no 'AI's', other than in computer games, average or not.

Humans don't make choices, they are caused by the forces of nature to do certain things. Higher complexity humans seem to not be bound by the laws of instinct, that is, they seem to want more than just sex work and doctrine, but they are still bound to the laws of physics and nature. Everything they do is caused, it is no choice of their own, if it seems random that is because of the I(Intelligience) routines. It is only psuedo random like a computer random number. Even if it was truly random, it would still not be a choice, but random events. Just like the post I made now. I did not choose to, the inertia of nature chose for me. Even a god cannot choose their own actions, the very concept of choice has no basis in reality.

And yet in computing we can have non-deterministc systems even tho' they have a clear pre-programmed goal?

What is consciousness? An experience. One need not think to experience existence. Thoughts are just floaty clouds of data, nothing more.

Given that I think experience is what you do with what happens to you I agree that what happens to you is being conscious but if by consciousness you mean self-awareness then I think thought much more than floaty clouds but I also have a difference between 'thoughting' and 'thinking' as the latter, for me, is what you do with language essentially and thoughting is what you do with the representations of reality that the senses provide.

A tree is complex but is simple, like a human. The human brain is a weak machine, it takes hundreds of scientists to accomplish a simple task of building a space shuttle, and half of the time it explodes. Examine your thoughts, even the philosophical "complex" ones...are they really even that complex?

There's chatbot AI, which is mediocre. It still counts as AI, although nothing is really "unnatural" about it since it obeys and was caused by the laws of nature.

Experience isn't something you "do". It simply is. It's not a choice you make, you don't do it, it is simply "is".
And what exactly is what you do with "thoughting" the representations of reality...flip it right side up from visual input...What does this thoughting consist of?

[Breath]

Humans don't make choices, they are caused by the forces of nature to do certain things.

So you keep alleging, over and over, without a scerrick of evidence. Is it a law of physics that everything obeys the laws of physics?

Your unshakeable faith in what is nothing more than metaphysical claptrap is somewhere between slightly amusing and alarming.

Breath

It's basic logic, nothing "claptrap" about it.

Yet more assertions. Are you able, at all, to mount an argument?
And which basic logic is it that you are referring to? Should the foundations of your faith be self-evident to me?

To believe otherwise, would be to have faith in the absurd.

Another assertion. You're quite full of those, aren't you?

I already explained in the previous paragraph how even gods cannot make choices, it's a logical impossibility on all levels.

You did no such think, you simply asserted a whole of shit, which seems to be your modus operandi.

You have faith in logical impossibilities, you have faith in metaphysical claptrap, not I. You cannot prove me wrong on any level, and you didn't even bother trying.

No, this is not how it works. You are the one making the claims, the onus is on you to demonstrate that you are not just another member of a priesthood.
A helpful hint - mount an argument for your case. If you are incapable of that, at least provide some incontrovertible evidence for your claims.

Breath

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

So you keep alleging, over and over, without a scerrick of evidence. Is it a law of physics that everything obeys the laws of physics?

Your unshakeable faith in what is nothing more than metaphysical claptrap is somewhere between slightly amusing and alarming.

Breath

Yet more assertions. Are you able, at all, to mount an argument?
And which basic logic is it that you are referring to? Should the foundations of your faith be self-evident to me?

Another assertion. You're quite full of those, aren't you?

You did no such think, you simply asserted a whole of shit, which seems to be your modus operandi.

No, this is not how it works. You are the one making the claims, the onus is on you to demonstrate that you are not just another member of a priesthood.
A helpful hint - mount an argument for your case. If you are incapable of that, at least provide some incontrovertible evidence for your claims.

Breath

I already proved my claims, which are indeed obvious to the majority of the scientific community, as they are obvious truths. We had a similar discussion with Blaggard the other day who refused to acknowledge the absolute truth. It's not my fault if you don't possess the comprehension to see that choice is a logically impossibility, which I made abundantly clear, and it should be clear to you by the morning, hopefully.

Look, I don't blame you for believing in it as you do, you've been taught at an early age you make choices. But seriously, quit while you're ahead, take your losses, this is an argument you cannot win.

It's not purely physical laws, it's the laws of logic, it's even beyond the laws of logic, I'd actually say this is an Absolute Truth, even gods abide by this certain mechanism.

[Breath]

I already proved my claims, which are indeed obvious to the majority of the scientific community, as they are obvious truths. We had a similar discussion with Blaggard the other day who refused to acknowledge the absolute truth. It's not my fault if you don't possess the comprehension to see that choice is a logically impossibility, which I made abundantly clear, and it should be clear to you by the morning, hopefully.

Look, I don't blame you for believing in it as you do, you've been taught at an early age you make choices. But seriously, quit while you're ahead, take your losses, this is an argument you cannot win.

It's not purely physical laws, it's the laws of logic, it's even beyond the laws of logic, I'd actually say this is an Absolute Truth, even gods abide by this certain mechanism.

Apart from your inability to mount an argument, you also seem to be challenged in the reading department.

I have never stated that I believe in choice; you have just made that up all by yourself. I only pointed out that your outright rejection of choice as being impossible was just an unargued assertion, which renders it of the same value as any other metaphysical claim ie claptrap.

Breath

[mtmynd1]

It's not my fault if you don't possess the comprehension to see that choice is a logically impossibility...

To deny choice is to deny the truth of duality. Every THING is subject to dualism for those who have Mind.

It's not purely physical laws, it's the laws of logic, it's even beyond the laws of logic, I'd actually say this is an Absolute Truth, even gods abide by this certain mechanism.

Freedom is not found within Mind or it's mechanism of logic. When and only when we can step of the Wheel of Life, i.e. dualism, is when we find our 'freedom'. So when you say "even gods abide by this certain mechanism", you are incorrect. God(s) that depend upon logic are not 'gods' but simply what Mind has created your god to be.

Too much Mind, too little Wisdom.

mtmynd1

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

It's not my fault if you don't possess the comprehension to see that choice is a logically impossibility...

To deny choice is to deny the truth of duality. Every THING is subject to dualism for those who have Mind.

It's not purely physical laws, it's the laws of logic, it's even beyond the laws of logic, I'd actually say this is an Absolute Truth, even gods abide by this certain mechanism.

Freedom is not found within Mind or it's mechanism of logic. When and only when we can step of the Wheel of Life, i.e. dualism, is when we find our 'freedom'. So when you say "even gods abide by this certain mechanism", you are incorrect. God(s) that depend upon logic are not 'gods' but simply what Mind has created your god to be.

Too much Mind, too little Wisdom.

mtmynd1

Seems like your arguments based on nonsensical claims. You state dualism like it's a fact. You state freedom like its a fact. It is not a fact. Putting caps lock does not make it a fact. Speaking of too much mind, too little wisdom, you should know not to use caps lock in such a manner, it makes you look desperate.

Not to mention, the statement "too much mind, too little wisdom" is just retarded. Seeing as wisdom is produced by the mind, one cannot have one without the other. Pure consciousness with no thought is not wisdom.

Breath, I mounted the argument quite well, but perhaps you lack in the comprehension department. This is because even if things were to be spontaneous, it would not be an actual choice, it would not be a decision, it would be the product of spontaneous events. A tree does not make a decision to grow. A human does not a make a decision to act, walk, or reason, type on keyboard, or think. Because a human has words in its minding saying "this is a decision" does not make it a real decision, sine the word decision is an abstraction of runes.

[mtmynd1]

Seems like your arguments based on nonsensical claims. You state dualism like it's a fact. You state freedom like its a fact. It is not a fact. Putting caps lock does not make it a fact. Speaking of too much mind, too little wisdom, you should know not to use caps lock in such a manner, it makes you look desperate.

Not to mention, the statement "too much mind, too little wisdom" is just retarded. Seeing as wisdom is produced by the mind, one cannot have one without the other. Pure consciousness with no thought is not wisdom.

"Seems like your arguments based on nonsensical claims."

Your use of the word "seems" is evidence you are unsure of what you say.

I state 'dualism' is fact because quite simply, it is. I state 'freedom' is a fact because it is what I have written it is. What you think you know is only that, my friend - what you THINK you know.

Wisdom is not produced by any means but rather wisdom is gained, GAINED, not as you think you know.

As anyone well-versed in writing, especially on a limited use like we have on this board, capitalizing is for emphasis, "Trixie-lips".

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

Seems like your arguments based on nonsensical claims. You state dualism like it's a fact. You state freedom like its a fact. It is not a fact. Putting caps lock does not make it a fact. Speaking of too much mind, too little wisdom, you should know not to use caps lock in such a manner, it makes you look desperate.

Not to mention, the statement "too much mind, too little wisdom" is just retarded. Seeing as wisdom is produced by the mind, one cannot have one without the other. Pure consciousness with no thought is not wisdom.

"Seems like your arguments based on nonsensical claims."

Your use of the word "seems" is evidence you are unsure of what you say.

I state 'dualism' is fact because quite simply, it is. I state 'freedom' is a fact because it is what I have written it is. What you think you know is only that, my friend - what you THINK you know.

Wisdom is not produced by any means but rather wisdom is gained, GAINED, not as you think you know.

As anyone well-versed in writing, especially on a limited use like we have on this board, capitalizing is for emphasis, "Trixie-lips".

Oh god. Nother pedantic warrior at the helm. No my use of the word seems is an idiom nothing more. It doesnt mean Im unsure of anything. Good god.

I already knew wisdom is gained, care to twist my arguments further? Gained, produced, same thing. A factory "produces" shit for people to eat, but it doesn't really "produce" them, it just transforms things from other things using inertia.

Dualism to what extent? Sure, you might be spectating a series of events, that your consciousness is not the body itself, but rather centered in the body. Sure, that kind of Dualism is real. As for choices and freedom? No, rubbish. And you're going to have to do better than this. You're not ever going to win the argument though, so naturally, this is the best you got.

Consciousness spectates a series of events. It's like a watching a movie you don't know will happen. Perhaps the movie is even randomly generated. But's it's not like you have any freedom, decisions, or choices.

Anyway these forums sicken me, I feel stupid playing these games, so your next argument, better be your best, your very best, 1 or more pages and I'll read it.

[Arising_uk]

A tree is complex but is simple, like a human. ...

Not really, trees are quite simple organisms compared to humans.

The human brain is a weak machine, it takes hundreds of scientists to accomplish a simple task of building a space shuttle, ...

Lots of Engineers, Mechanics and a few Scientists.

and half of the time it explodes. ...

No idea how you get this idea? 135 missions and two disasters or six shuttles and two losses does not appear to equate to a half.

Examine your thoughts, even the philosophical "complex" ones...are they really even that complex?

Depends where you start from, start from the bottom and very complex I think.

There's chatbot AI, which is mediocre. It still counts as AI, ...

Since none of them can pass a Turing Test then by definition not AI.

although nothing is really "unnatural" about it since it obeys and was caused by the laws of nature.

More like the rules of linguistics.

Experience isn't something you "do". It simply is. It's not a choice you make, you don't do it, it is simply "is".

No, that's what happens to you, experience is what you do with whats happening or happened to you.

And what exactly is what you do with "thoughting" the representations of reality...flip it right side up from visual input...

There is no 'right-side up' from the input, there's just photons hitting the retina.

What does this thoughting consist of?

Using memory to manipulate the representations created by the CNS without the original inputs.

[GreatandWiseTrixie]

A tree is complex but is simple, like a human. ...

Not really, trees are quite simple organisms compared to humans.

The human brain is a weak machine, it takes hundreds of scientists to accomplish a simple task of building a space shuttle, ...

Lots of Engineers, Mechanics and a few Scientists.

and half of the time it explodes. ...

No idea how you get this idea? 135 missions and two disasters or six shuttles and two losses does not appear to equate to a half.

Examine your thoughts, even the philosophical "complex" ones...are they really even that complex?

Depends where you start from, start from the bottom and very complex I think.

There's chatbot AI, which is mediocre. It still counts as AI, ...

Since none of them can pass a Turing Test then by definition not AI.

although nothing is really "unnatural" about it since it obeys and was caused by the laws of nature.

More like the rules of linguistics.

Experience isn't something you "do". It simply is. It's not a choice you make, you don't do it, it is simply "is".

No, that's what happens to you, experience is what you do with whats happening or happened to you.

And what exactly is what you do with "thoughting" the representations of reality...flip it right side up from visual input...

There is no 'right-side up' from the input, there's just photons hitting the retina.

What does this thoughting consist of?

Using memory to manipulate the representations created by the CNS without the original inputs.

You see the world upside-down. Then your brain flips it rightside up. Thought that was mainstream information.
AI doesn't have to pass the Turing test to be "AI". Though the very word "AI" is nonsensical, because nothing is truly "artificial". That is, it is a product of Nature.

Don't get what you mean with "what you do" with what happens to you.
Your brain sees some light, your brain filters it, and you experience the energy produced by your brain. You don't actually "do" anything, you just watch your brain go through natural processes. That is experience.

The tree analogy was meant like this. A tree seems complex, and that it "grows." Just like a human seems "complex" and that it "grows as a person, grows as an individual, makes great complex achievements" but it is only the product of natural forces. The universe seems "complex" but it's just the product of natural forces.

[Arising_uk]

You see the world upside-down. Then your brain flips it rightside up. Thought that was mainstream information.

Bit simplistic I think as I get that the photons are going through a lens but it doesn't start as an 'image' but a whole spread of 'dots' and the processing starts as soon as the electro-chemical reactions start at the optic-nerve, although if by 'brain' you mean the CNS then I agree that in a sense we make the world the 'right way up' but the world has no 'right way up' in reality.

AI doesn't have to pass the Turing test to be "AI".

It's a good start and so far there are no AI's.

Though the very word "AI" is nonsensical, because nothing is truly "artificial". That is, it is a product of Nature.

Well, if you describe any product of man as natural then I'll agree this is a truism.

Don't get what you mean with "what you do" with what happens to you.
Your brain sees some light, your brain filters it, and you experience the energy produced by your brain. You don't actually "do" anything, you just watch your brain go through natural processes. That is experience.

Who or what is doing this watching?

The tree analogy was meant like this. A tree seems complex, and that it "grows." Just like a human seems "complex" and that it "grows as a person, grows as an individual, makes great complex achievements" but it is only the product of natural forces. The universe seems "complex" but it's just the product of natural forces.

I'll agree that it is but as I pointed-out to you before, we have non-determistic computer programs that have fixed goals, so we differ from the tree in our complex choices to achieve our goals.