The Hard Problem: Illusions (1/3)

On these videos I explore what is called the Hard Problem of Consciousness.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• hard
• problem
• consciousness
• chalmers
• earl
• mind

[trufkin1000]

Dude, read up on interface theory and other related topics. The human sciences are based on the human senses; if we are not able to sense it, it cannot be measured. However, we are not able to sense 96% of the Universe; 96% of anything at that. How are you going to measure the 96% of what you can't experience? Thus, our sciences only will give us a 4% understanding of the universe, and maybe not even the truthful 4%.

Also, read up on Quantum Theory before you respond.

[lookatmepleasesir]

@trufkin1000 we can't sense many of the things we can measure, we have to observe them and measure them through their effects

[kirshara]

Kant?

[NorseProphet]

We reached the limits of philosophy a long time ago. Philosophy has no place in modern science. The only way to achieve progress from now on, is by studying the brain and the rest of the universe empirically. Your speech is eloquent and the ideas are nice, but they can never bring us closer to the Truth about this universe. Transcendental idealism and other philosophies take us nowhere. Science can take us anywhere.

The brain can be likened to a massively parallel processing quantum computer.

[demrings]

Profound.

I agree with LordImmolation: your theory could be called idealism, specifically transcendental idealism, but at the very least you're framing it in a new and very exciting way.

Personally, I think it's a lot bigger than that. This goes way beyond a mere 'reframing'.

[meinonghitdatbong]

ahh man i thought you were going to be an eliminativist or something for the first 3 and a half minutes but then... nooo not the I-bomb!?!? ill be watching more later

[LordImmolation]

Good video, but Idealism has been proposed for quite a while. One of my favorite quotes (I've forgotten the source now) has some slightly idealist overtones you might appreciate - "Objectivity is just subjectivity that we can all agree upon"

However, for a criticism of this view, I would suggest reading into the 'En-active approach' particularly O'Reagan.

[underpantsjihad]

This philosophical proposition, while unpopular now. Was actually dominant for quite some time in philosophical circles. In fact, it was never defeated. The problem with it was not that it wasn't true, it was completely true. But no one can find one instance where it actualy matters at all. It only exists as a general sense of the "noumenal" or "absolute" and may very well have been (if you follow Derrida) what spawned the world religions.