/sci/ - Science & Math

Imagine how life would be if there would be nothing left to discover, nothing left to know. I'd be begging for death. I believe death is a process one needs to go through in order to purify one's soul/consciousness/whatever. The price is that you'll have to forget everything about yourself. Nothing is lost though, only forgotten to discover once more. Again and again.

>>6811947
>There is something that associates your soul (consciousness) with one particular brain. To think this is some kind of physical property of electricity or a bunch of cells or carbon atoms is just backward and absurd:
What's absurd is your baseless spiritual babbling.

How do we know that "we" exist? Simple. We wouldn't be perceiving this thought process in this brain if we didn't exist. There is something that separates the phenomena of THIS brain filtering into THIS subjective observer from the phenomena of THAT brain filtering into THAT observer. You can recognize that THAT observer could conceivably be in THIS brain and you would be nothing: the same rule that applies to 99.99999% of human beings to ever live besides you could also be applied to you, and the whole world including the body you once inhabited could be 'other people.'

There is something that associates your soul (consciousness) with one particular brain. To think this is some kind of physical property of electricity or a bunch of cells or carbon atoms is just backward and absurd: consciousness is very real, we can test it constantly. We have less proof that gravity is real than that our own consciousness exists, and we have no way to determine that our consciousness is just a physical property of our brain.

Why do people assume that the brain produces consciousness? Entirely because our perceptions match a pattern that can be measured by measuring the electrical impulses of a brain.

Something entirely magical can fit the pattern of something physical, but the magical thing cannot possibly be determined using physics to be dependent on that physical thing. But to deny something so fundamental and so outside-physical-norms as consciousness is incredibly easy: you can talk about everything scientific in the physical world with perfect precision and have absolutely no knowledge of what exists outside its bounds.

DMT acts as a gateway chemical for your astral self/soul/consciousness to leave the body and travel to other realms/dimensions/planes of existence etc. All this has yet to even be researched by scientists.


At lower doses this does not happen and regular psychedelic introspections occur.

>>6495587
Our soul/consciousness leaves our body, we then float in a void, in complete nothingness.

At that point, we will either continue to stay in that void for eternity or decide to reincarnate physicly

>>6246637
The brain does not produce any metaphysical magic. The brain is a physical organ and all its products are physical. A soul/consciousness has no place in science.

>>6246620
A soul/consciousness is metaphysical bullshit without possible evidence. Hitchens' razor tells us to dismiss it as non-existent. Deal with it, /x/tard.

>>6227901
What behaviour? I'm pretty sure I can perform any possible behaviour, yet I know I have no "consciousness". What behaviour can people with a soul/consciousness do which normal people can't?

>>6227910
That's neuronal activity. I have neuronal activity but I don't have any metaphysical properties.

>>6227875
No such thing. Untestable and unobservable entities/phenomena do not exist from a scientific point of view. Apply Hitchens' razor.

What anaesthesiologists do is manipulating wakefulness/responsiveness. This is a physiological state and has nothing to do with a soul/consciousness.

>>6227845
A soul/consciousness is by definition metaphysical. A "physical consciousness" is a contradiction.

>>6225226
Who?

>>6225230
Your lack of reading comprehension isn't my fault.

>>6225260
Come back when you can tell us how to test your claims. What technology should we use to detect an immaterial soul/consciousness? Unless you tell us how to test it, we will have to dismiss it.

>>6216766
Wait so you think spirit/soul=consciousness

Otherwise your attempt at linking the two definitions makes no sense at all.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>6186267
>"Moral" claims are meaningless becaue morality is a meaningless religious concept.
So we should just let anarchy rain I suppose?

>No, just common sense.
It was once common sense that the earth was flat. Appeal to tradition fallacy.

>Philosophy of neuroscience is the worst of all. It's literally just "cannot know nuthin" and soul/consciousness dualism metaphysics.
Yeah, that's one side of the debate. The other side are those of the logical positivists

>If you have no argument, then don't reply at all. We don't care about your emotional dislike for certain facts.
Qualia are 'what it's like' such as sensible qualities. Consciousness is metacognizance.

>No, by empty I mean meaningless and useless. Of no value at all.
Undermining your scientific position again.

>projection
Projecting what? I don't deny the scientific method. I'm a logical positivist. But I do not ignorantly dismiss the importance of philosophy like you are maintaining to do.

>Don't bother waking up. We won't miss you.
Soz not going yet babe. Waking up from what? How can I wake up from subconscious to conscious if it dont exist amirite lol!!

>>6186251
>are what philosophy deals with.
I don't need philosophy in order to make true statements.

>So you admit philosophy has utility?
No.

>philosophy of neuroscience
Philosophy of neuroscience is the worst of all. It's literally just "cannot know nuthin" and soul/consciousness dualism metaphysics. The epitome of untestable and unscientific nonsense. If neuroscience ever wants to become a real hard science, it has to rigorously eliminate all philosophical garbage.

>>6166302
Dualistic soul/consciousness nonsense is not science and has nothing to do with scientific psychology.

>>6166266
His definition of psychology is wrong. Psychology is the study o human behaviour. Dualistic soul/consciousness garbage is not psychology and belongs on /x/.

>>6109440
"Unconscious" is a physiologically defined state. I am clearly not unconscious, since I demonstrate responsiveness to outer stimuli. This is simple biology and has nothing to do with soul/consciousness metaphysics. Your equivocation troll is boring, old and easily disproved.

>>6056949
>I literally just said that you can't, because it would require a separate entity to verify it,
This is called "peer review". Please learn the scientific method.

>you can not verify that I am conscious
That's why scientists dismiss the notion of a soul/consciousness by applying Hitchens' razor.

>you just assume that I am
No, I don't. I do not make unnecessary and unscientific assumptions.

>it is not determinable through science.
Then what are you doing on /sci/?

>it is only determinable through logic.
>the logic was posted
I don't think you understand what logic means. Please take a course on formal logic. "Muh belief" is not logic.

>consciousness and observation are one synonymous concept.
No, they are not. The physical process of observation has nothing to do with metaphysical properties.

>>6056853
It is your burden of proof. You have to define it rigorously and demonstrate scientific evidence.

>>6056855
>find the word soul
He used its synonym "consciousness". Do you have problems with the vocabulary of the English language?

>listen, please holy fuck man
I am neither a man nor holy. "Holy" is not a scientific term. Please keep religion out of /sci/.

>NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT SOULS.
>NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT METAPHYSICS
At least one poster ITT claimed the existence of a soul/consciousness. Read the thread.

>I don't believe in souls or magic, or metaphysics
Then what are you still arguing? If you agree that a soul/consciousness doesn't exist (or at least agree that the very notion of it is unscientific as fuck), you should either argue in favor of my position or ignore the thread.

>>6056854
>>However, we are trying to define something that is majorly undefined
>do it. I'm waiting

does Forum not mean anything to you? Communication..? we* are trying, not him, by himself, with a fucking stopwatch.
why even post that.

>You claimed the process of observation proves the existence of soul/consciousness. As I explained, it does not.

he literally never said that once. source the damn words or stop using them.
and where is that synonym?

sources man, get em out. start greentexting
I want to see the word Soul in my/his post
as well as the word Metaphysics used in our own arguments, or any synonyms.

>>6056840
>However, we are trying to define something that is majorly undefined
Do it. I'm waiting.

>If you want to claim
I don't claim anything. I only apply Hitchens' razor to obviously unscientific claims.

>This in no way contradicts what I said and no one is claiming otherwise.
You claimed the process of observation proves the existence of soul/consciousness. As I explained, it does not.

>>6056841
>but I never mentioned soul.
You used a synonym. Cool story, troll.

>there's no soul, there's no metaphysics
That's what I'm telling you.

>and that is the progenitor of consciousness.
No, it isn't. Please keep spiritualist/dualist beliefs on /x/. /sci/ is a science board.

>that doesn't say a goddamn thing about whats behind our eyes
Behind my eyes is the optic nerve, which connects them to my brain.

>you can't observe their consciousness
Exactly. That's why the concept is unscientific hogwash and to be dismissed by Hitchens' razor.

>>6056833
>don't even use that word
I use whatever word most accurately describes the observations. That's how we do it in science.

>he is not implying anything metaphysical
He was arguing in favor of a soul/consciousness. Tell me how that isn't metaphysical nonsense.

>the statement he's making is pretty grounded
Grounded in what? His spiritual beliefs do not qualify as scientific evidence. Scientific evidence has to objective.

>observation CAN NOT exist without
Observation is a physical process of measurment. An interaction with the environment is being detected and the information is quantitatively or qualitatively processed. This does not imply any magical souls. Please stop trolling.

>lizards and birds, and larvae. fucking algae has observation, are they conscious?
No, they are not, and neither are humans. No organism has any metaphysical properties. From a scientific point of view we dismiss this nonsense by applying Hitchens' razor.

>>6010146
I hope so. Whenever I see /sci/ posters seriously believing in a soul/consciousness, I want to believe they are trolls.

>>6005433
>bnsaiufhbpsbfh is a physical thing

Cool story, bro. Would you mind telling me its physical effects? Oh wait, there are none. There is no reason to believe in a soul/consciousness at all. Your dualism crap is dismissed by Hitchens' razor.