Gesundheit2

Nobody gives a fuck about you. You're all alone.

Take her alone and start making out. That's what I would do.

@Blackhawk Lol. So you're basically saying that every ISIS member wears explosives all the time, even while asleep. And apparently when they hear the sound of American forces, they run searching for civilians and blow themselves up. Yeah. I think that story makes sense.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It's just the transition from warm to cold that's really difficult. Remind yourself that it's seconds of pain instead of hours of regret.

Come on, bro. Which story is more likely?

Unless he's the plumber I think you're safe.

Sources?

Feeling a bit nostalgic? He has over 500 videos in his YouTube channel alone.

I would say neither. They're mostly secular rationalists with a strong religious core.

I have more than two friends who have higher cognition than me but are still religious, Blue/Orange. So, either I'm Red, or the model is wrong.

This thread reminds me of myself when I was a kid and I used to play GTA2 on my aunt's PC. You know Windows has this "refresh" functionality for the items on display. This refresh was translated into my language to a word that means update. So, silly me. I thought computers were smart, and I spent hours for days and weeks pressing F5 thinking and hoping that it would somehow update to GTA3 at some point ??‍♂️ Don't tell anyone, but I also was doing that to the desktop shortcut

Consciousness can't be reduced to just inputs and outputs. There's creative imagination, automatic healing ability, tendency for delusion, creative blending, etc. Computers can't think. It's not possible for a computer to have creative thoughts, regardless of how complex and sophisticated it gets. Why? Because everything a computer does has to be predetermined first by the programmers. And all we can teach a computer is simply what we already know. So the outputs are strictly defined and limited by the inputs, unlike with consciousness, which seems to be expanding all the time, and/or that it's infinite. Also, a computer can't go around exploring reality and creating meanings out of it. And if it could do that, then it's gonna be very stupid in comparison to us because we would be the ones to construct the axioms and most essential algorithms to construct the meanings. We would be able to see through them clearly once we learn their code. We could potentially program a computer to have a sense of self, which basically means the appearance of identity. Like, the robot would be able to cry when hit and then hit back if possible. It would be able to protect itself, but it would not be alive or conscious, only working as instructed or failing to work properly. Another thing computers would definitely miss is the possibility of being deluded. Since computers work strictly as instructed, they aren't capable of making mistakes or misunderstandings. For a computer, it's an all or nothing process every single time, even when programmed with complex nuances, which is already the case, that'd still be the case. Computers could not deal with new nuanced situations spontaneously, and this is non-negotiable. They just don't understand or have any depth whatsoever.

@mandyjw Men will always judge women based on looks. Doesn't matter if she's a saint or a whore. But of course it's a bit inappropriate here and we should not overdo it.

Computers are really nothing but a huge super complex calculator.

@Someone here Is a calculator conscious?

I don't remember where I read it, but some wise dude said half-knowledge can be worse than ignorance.

And I could also make the case that most education is low consciousness.

Here's a chronological order for the epistemology behind this question: There is the assumption that there is such a thing as consciousness, which is a phenomenon that you experience but have no clue what it is. On top of that, an assumption that consciousness is a separate and distinct thing. On top of both, an assumption that consciousness is not only a thing, but a property that things can have. On top of that, an assumption that computers are not already conscious, and that human and animals are, and that humans can somehow figure out the secret behind consciousness.

I don't know why this would be the case. If there's no objective measure of awareness levels, how can we assert such a claim? I agree with the rest, even though I don't like that post-modernist way of thinking.

Death is inescapable and all-encapsulating. We can only fight it and postpone it, but never kill it. It's already death.

I agree.

I honestly don't see that. She's below average to me. Like literally, not even her voice is sexy or anything gives me a good feeling. And apart from physical looks, she seems tense and a neurotic tryhard. And on top of all that, I don't think she's legit enlightened. More like psychedelic and circumstances enlightened at best.

Conspiracy theory at its core is a paranoid state of consciousness, more like a mental illness. This Paranoia is often generalized and involves various areas of one's life. It does not go away easily in my experience, but CBT can help. You can notice fearful patterns of behavior and thinking in almost every domain of a conspiracy theorist's life. Conspiratorial thinking used to be harmless before at least to society at large, even though still delusional. But right now it's becoming dangerous with the anti-vaxxers and shit like that. It's really tragic. Essentially, to heal a conspiratorial mind, you need a trusted authority that can actually calm down the fear. But it's a catch-22 problem, because there's an inherent lack of trust in all authorities, including yourself or any other authority you may try to establish. They have a faulty epistemology that's very hard to fix. Your best bet would be to offer a bigger picture perspective every time a conspiracy topic is brought up, and then lead from there by your intuition.