Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Federico Faggin: "Quantum Fields are conscious & have free will" "You cannot create something that can know itself by something that doesn't even know what knowing means." The inventor of the first commercial microprocessor argues that consciousness cannot emerge from non-conscious matter. No mechanism can explain how awareness arises...

32,121 görüntüleme • 21 saat önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

André Duqum is a wonderful host and guide in this conversation, where we discuss the fundamental nature of reality, quantum and classical physics, self knowing, courage, love, consciousness, free will, and artificial intelligence, among other topics listed in the chapter descriptions below. As André shares from my newest book "Irreducible: Consciousness, Life, Computers, and Human Nature"... "We are eternal, conscious beings rather than perishable bodies, and we are here to learn crucial aspects of ourselves by interacting with each other in the physical universe that we have co created for this very purpose." It is with great hope that viewers of this conversation may find meaning in the ideas discussed, and encouragement to further your own self learning. - Federico Full Video 🌍👁️ Discussion Chapters👇 Intro His Spontaneous Spiritual Awakening Defining Consciousness: Classical vs Quantum View Can computers be Conscious? How Truth Transcends Theory Idealism vs Monad Theory Our Deepest Desire: To Know Ourselves Seity vs Soul Individuality & What Carries Over After Death We Are All Part of One Whole How Emotion & Meaning Impacts Reality Suffering as a Catalyst for Growth Taking Responsibility for Our Lives & Spiritual Growth The Very Real Force of Love Where Physics & Spirituality Meet Distinguishing Free Will & Unconscious Habits Reincarnation & NDEs Explained How Much We Currently Understand about Reality Shifting From the Mind to the Heart Facing the Future of Artificial Intelligence Collective Consciousness & Evil vs Good Competition vs Collaboration Are Aliens Real? Conclusion Essentia Foundation Mondadori #consciousness #freewill #quantumphysics #spirituality #selfknowing #awakening #Irreducible #federicofaggin #knowthyself #AI #existence #reality #natureofreality #mondadori

Federico Faggin

18,047 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

David Chalmers on why consciousness is science's greatest unsolved problem: Science has mapped subatomic particles, distant stars, the chemistry of life yet it remains almost completely silent on the one thing we know most directly: our own conscious experience. In a rare early interview, philosopher David Chalmers explains why: "Consciousness is at once the most familiar thing in the world and the most mysterious. Consciousness is what we start with when it comes to knowing the world. I know that I exist. I know that I'm conscious. Everything else is secondary." And yet, despite this intimacy, consciousness sticks out like a sore thumb in the scientific picture. Chalmers points to a deep irony: science has made extraordinary progress on phenomena that are extraordinarily remote: subatomic particles, distant galaxies, the molecular machinery of biology while making almost no progress on the one thing closest to us. Why? Because science, by design, eliminates the subjective. "To do proper science, you have to be objective. You have to eliminate anything subjective from the picture." He uses heat as the perfect example. Physics gives us a complete account of heat molecules in motion, energy transfer, temperature gradients. It explains every objective aspect of the phenomenon. But it never explains what hotness actually feels like. "Science doesn't actually give a theory of the conscious feeling of hotness." This is what Chalmers calls the Hard Problem of Consciousness. You can trace every neural signal from your heat sensor along your nerves into your brain and still have explained nothing about the subjective experience of feeling warm. As interviewer Jeffrey Mishlove puts it: you can't even do science without a conscious mind to observe, interpret, and make meaning of data. Consciousness is the precondition for science itself and yet science has no framework to account for it. Chalmers' conclusion is striking: The methods of science may need to be expanded. Consciousness might not be something science explains away. It might be something science has to learn to start with.

Mateus — eu/acc 🇪🇺

31,628 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

John Searle: consciousness cannot be an illusion and here's the argument that makes it undeniable Science has a long track record of overturning our intuitions. The table looks solid, it isn't. The sun appears to set, it doesn't. We've learned to accept that appearances deceive us, and that reality lies beneath. But philosopher John Searle argues there is exactly one domain where this move simply cannot be made: consciousness itself. "Where consciousness is concerned, you can't make the standard appearance/reality distinction that we make for the rest of the world." His logic is simple. When a scientist tells you the table isn't really solid and that it's a cloud of micro-particles, you can accept that. The appearance (solidity) and the reality (particles) are two different things, and you can hold them apart. Same with the sunset. It looks like the sun moves. It doesn't. The rotation of the Earth creates an illusion. Appearance and reality come apart and you understand the gap. Now try applying that same logic to your conscious experience. Someone claims your pain isn't really there, that your awareness is just an illusion. But here, Searle says, the distinction collapses entirely: "Where the existence of consciousness is concerned, the appearance is the reality. There's no way that some guy can come to me and convince me I'm not conscious if I think I'm conscious, I am conscious." This is a structural point about what consciousness fundamentally is. For every other phenomenon, the appearance can be explained away by pointing to what's "really" happening underneath. But consciousness is the very medium in which all appearances occur. There is no "underneath" to retreat to. To say consciousness is an illusion, you would first need to be conscious of the illusion. The argument defeats itself on contact.

Big Brain Philosophy

17,476 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce