I don't understand how atoms inside my head can create all my immaterial subjective experience. From a purely physicalist point of view consciousness shouldn't exist.

>he can't into emergent phenomena
skill issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

You have sensory organs that process light in your eyeballs and air waves in your ears into pictures and sounds you can recognize, a lot like a movie. It makes sense, think about how the eye is like a camers full of tiny sensors that activate when light hits them. Different frequencies of light are different colors, and that chemical information is turned into pictures by activating neurons in you brain.

>>16707535
Consciousness itself is understood by neuroscientists as the organization of energetic activity in the brain. To explain consciousness as a physical process is a profound question. Much of the brain remains a mystery, that is why I am skeptical of measures of intelligence like IQ yet think they may have some usefulness.

>>16707544
>Consciousness itself is understood by neuroscientists as
Talking out of your ass, lol

>>16707527 (OP)
>I don't understand how
>shouldn't exist
Your personal lack of understanding is not evidence of anything.

>>16707527 (OP)
The mistake is using the simplified materialist model that everything is little billiard balls when that is just the easy story they tell you in school. The brain has a bunch of electromagnetic and quantum shit going on that we don’t understand yet

>>16707535
You're confusing a description of the physical process with the experience itself.

>>16707527 (OP)
You aren't special. Consciousness isn't special

>>16707527 (OP)
For all intents and purposes consciousness doesn't exist in the scientific model. The only reason there's a "problem" around that is because that implies the scientific model doesn't describe all of existence, which makes scientists and materialists butthurt.

>>16707527 (OP)
Electrons rising and falling ionization levels absorb and emit photons. Consciousness is just photons which pass through a chain reaction of atomic and molecular interactions within a synapse or organ. That is why when you are conscious you can see things. Its light through your eyes, which is just photons causing electrical signals of 1, 2, or 3 volts in the eye and cascading into the body, or when eyes are closed, ionic molecular interactions causing low voltage photochemical reactions which create light which is shaped by the waveguide pathway of your organic structure. The consciousness as a whole is the sum total of the magnetic field created by these individual photon/electron interactions.
That is why when you close your eyes and touch an object, you can visualize the structure of the object, because you have linked into the magnetic field contained the electrical information of the object.

>>16707737
ummm… you DO know that blind people exist, right?

>>16707742
Can you prove they're conscious?

>>16707752
it’s a little thing called being able to hear

>>16707754
I'm not convinced.

>>16707527 (OP)
You don't understand how atoms inside your body can create all the objective properties of your existence either, so obviously you won't get the second order implications that arise from those properties.

>>16707635
No he is describing how the physical properties induce the experience.

>>16707527 (OP)
There is zero observational evidence that consciousness exists, as such there is nothing to understand.

>>16707527 (OP)
>if i dont understand something then it doesnt exist
stop understanding 4chan OP

>>16707723
I agree. We observe patterns and create models to describe these patterns. We have observed patterns related to ourselves but do not have a model that fully explains those observations.

>>16707527 (OP)
The real dilemma isn't how physics can give rise to consciousness, but what the hell is "physics" to begin with when we remove all reference to sensory experience. You think you have a "mind-independent" conception of the physical world, but when you ponder what would it mean for the physical universe to exist without there being anyone to experience it, you find yourself imagining your consciousness floating about in an otherwise uninhabited universe. You thus are still thinking about physical existence defined in terms of sensory experience, either actual or hypothetical/potential.

At the same time, the evidence is overwhelming that the universe doesn't revolve around minds like ours but that they evolved gradually from smaller parts that cannot have anything we can conceive as subjective experience.

There's one way to conceive of physics without reference to sensory experience, namely purely as a abstract or mathematical construct. But that doesn't sound terribly "physical" or "material". Max Tegmark bites the bullet and says that the physical world is literally just math and exists only in the same way as any coherent mathematical structure exists.

>>16707527 (OP)
atoms aren't real

>>16707759
But who's experiencing the experience?

>>16710838
Nothing, the self is an illusion. (You) don't exist.

>>16707527 (OP)
Don't feel bad, nobody does.

>>16707527 (OP)
>my immaterial subjective experience
no such thing

>>16707527 (OP)
>I
citation needed

>>16707643
>You aren't special.
Fundamentally incorrect. Special relativity already tells us that time and length are subjective to the observer.
Many interpretations of quantum mechanics, including the main one, also have observer-dependent collapse, some even have subjective collapse.
A few years ago, a Wigner's Friend experiment was performed in the UK that concluded if the mainstream interpretation is the correct, then collapse *must* be subjective.

You are in fact very special, OP.>>16707527 (OP)

>>16710838
Whoever has the sensory organs he was describing.

>>16707527 (OP)
What is your brain doing when it remembers what something looks/sounds like. Why are the sensory organs only involved the first time?

>>16713312
Mirror neurons.

>>16707528
emergence of mind from mindless substances is a retarded argument. non-emergence is more palatable, whether you adopt an eliminativist or panpsychic approach.

>>16707535
Niggas who LARP as objectivists while knowing nothing about theory of mind is funny.

>>16707756
But can you prove you are not convinced?

>>16707527 (OP)
>Consciousness existed before matter.

>>16707527 (OP)
>Brain is a reinforcement learner that recognizes patterns
>Recognizes the pattern of the self
>There's enough leftover brain to have a separate decision maker and analyst
>Consciousness is the result
This is obvious. And yet, most animals that we consider "conscious" cannot recognize their reflection in a mirror. Can you recognize your reflection in God's plan?

>>16707527 (OP)
> From a purely physicalist point of view consciousness shouldn't exist.
Why not?

>>16707527 (OP)
>purely physicalist point of view
Maybe this is your problem. That is dumb as fuck

>>16707527 (OP)
>From a purely physicalist point of view consciousness shouldn't exist.
where proof? why would you expect that?
>from a purely monkey point of view radio waves aren't real

>>16715281
That's the hope for non-materialists. The materialist approach is "this is it, not a simulation this is just base reality," and the other side is the overlapping of drug trips and philosophical questioning that it is logical we are spirits playing a videogame.

>>16716099
People like you give me hope. I don't have Faith, I just think it's a coin flip what happens after we die. The silence is deafening.

I also think it's logical we're here to experience non-infinity so we're not told suit so our choices matter more.

>>16718213
Have you ever wondered if your perspective on experience is part of something greater?

>>16707737
>consciousness is photons
>consciousness is ...... light
you are getting close

>>16707737
John 1:5:

"God is light; in him there is no darkness at all."

https://youtu.be/4fDETIdUF-Q?si=dfr3-QFKlCO4xyxl&t=1476

>>16718360
If you legitimately think they are getting closer, then you are getting colder.

>>16718369
you are legitimately a cum guzzling retard but you are still part of gods plan

>>16718372
You are legitimately just talking to yourself because it the only person you have had direct physical contact with for the last five years.

>>16718374
I just creampied your mom last night

>>16718380
Yea being a product of incest seems about right for your level of intellect.

>>16718383
>your mom after I made my deposit in her sperm bank

>>16707527 (OP)
>atoms
There are far more than you are apparently capable of imagining.
For that matter, the fundamental component is the clock ticking through your neurons right now. The complexity arises in the secondary effects.
>>16707737
>chemical mediated electrical signals are photons
Uh.
>>16712023
>they're subjective
Stop drinking the koolaid, dumbass. Wave functions don't collapse, they exert. Work is done at the point where work is possible. Your investigations aren't fine grain enough to isolate the confounding variables.

>>16718384
Yes it makes sense that you would see your incest through rose tinted glasses even though she is obviously several standard deviations of BMI above the young lady you are pretending is your mother.

>>16718390
>your mom when I told her I am thinking of making her my primary bank for direct deposits

>>16718393
Yes rose tinted just like that which completely ignore the obesity of your actual mother whose incestuous relationship you can't stop projecting about.

>>16718397
>your mom when she hears me pull up

>>16718400
Does she have to sign off on all your posts, is that why you have to keep pretending like your mom has a healthy BMI and you can't not reply when someone insults her?