this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
581 points (96.9% liked)

Science Memes

11414 readers
1160 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

code "object-request-error"

msg 'Invalid status 503 Service Unavailable for Some("01/93/da/2e/55/b3/75/2a/84/1c/2ee79309c6b9.jpeg") - {"message":"failure to get a peer from the ring-balancer"}'

lmao so true

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Speak for yourself. I try not to think.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What if life's evolutionary end point is always sentience?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Then life is even more pointless and cruel than it appears.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 20 hours ago

That would be poetically fitting for an universe determined to die a heat death.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Depends on what you mean by 'consciousness'. If you mean the actual biological process that is happening in our brains - yes. If you mean something different, it is probably not a scientific meaning but more a philosophical or religious one, which is ultimately not a bad thing but you should separate this from actual science.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

If by consciousness, you just mean thinking, then sure.

But if you mean awareness — “phenomena”, if you prefer — then I don’t see why an experiential state would (or could) be entirely secondary to a physical state.

It is, after all, possible for me to write words and perform other physical actions based on my experiential state. In many ways, my mental world is more “real” than the physical world.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think rejecting physicalism necessarily requires embracing the idea of a soul. I’m an atheist, and a neutral monist, for example. But if I had to choose between only physicalism and idealism, idealism makes more sense. Before anything else, I’m conscious.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

No, you're the electrochemical interactions happening inside the lump of fat.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

I'm still rooting for Idealism or the immortal soul to somehow be a thing.

Go Banana!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

"The material, sensuously perceptible world to which we ourselves belong is the only reality.... Our consciousness and thinking, however supra-sensuous they may seem, are the product of a material, bodily organ, the brain. Matter is not a product of mind, but mind itself is merely the highest product of matter." — Karl Marx

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I know he said that, I'm saying his conclusion was incorrect.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

So you're saying matter is a product of the mind? Or what "conclusion" are you talking about

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why must matter or mind be the product of one another? Why can they not be separate yet interacting phenomena?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

things conform to law, regardless of the subjects awareness of it, we should strive to learn the laws that govern the universe and leave behind obsolete idealism. Modern science has done a lot uncovering how our brain works and the complex processes behind conciousness, at this point arguing for conciousness as something separate is like arguing that rain is caused by deities.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I would like to see a source that says "This is how the brain creates consciousness."

Not about correlations, but as that being the absolute undeniable source of consciousness.

Cause the last I checked it was still a hard problem with no real answer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Action potential doesn't do thinking. Thinking happens at neuron junctions and that shits chemical and analogue. The electrical part just moves the data to the next synapse. There are some gap junctions but those aren't really associated with thinking.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sorry Natural Intelligence bros, but meat can't think. You've been duped into thinking human beings are conscious by Big Omega 3. Intelligence can only exist in computers using real electricity. Not that piddly ion pump stuff.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What about photons, hmmm? They're used for quantum computing and don't (technically) need "real electricity".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago

Hmm, still a boson particle, the same as electrons. Organic neurons don't transmit boson particles, they create a fake electromagnetic field by equalising ions in solution. It's lame and not real intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 days ago

We are ALL thinking lumps of fat on this blessed day :)

load more comments
view more: next ›