175
submitted 1 year ago by Grayox@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Interesting article didnt know where it fit best so I wanted to share it here.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bloodfoot@programming.dev 52 points 1 year ago

Interesting but I struggle to see how this hypothesis could ever be proven or disproven. If it can’t actually be tested then I don’t see how it presents more scientific value any other religious or superstitious belief.

[-] FaceDeer@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've long been fond of panpsychism, but I think it's less a hypothesis to be "proven" and more just a different way of framing the questions behind what consciousness is and how it can be defined. Under panpsychism consciousness isn't a binary property that some things have and other things don't, it's a continuum from zero to one (and if you count humans as "1" on the consciousness scale it also makes sense to consider values above that - there's no reason to assume that humans are the "most conscious possible" state of being).

So when you're reading about panpsychism and it says something like "individual electrons are conscious", bear in mind that they're proposing considering electrons to be, like, 10^-10 "consciousness units" worth of conscious. It's not like they're actually aware of themselves in some meaningful way like humans are. That's a common "giggle factor" problem for panpsychism. And it's also not saying that any arbitrary larger-scale structure us "more conscious" than humans, the way that the components of a large-scale structure interact is super important. A rock is not equivalently as "conscious" as a human brain even if they have the same number of particles interacting within them.

[-] lily33@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Well, hypothetically, if someone defined the "consciousness" of every particle mathematically, and then figured out the laws that would allow us to compute (or at least approximate) the "consciousness" of a composite system (such as a brain), then we'd would have a genuine scientific theory.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
175 points (84.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43676 readers
1756 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS