• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

On Consciousness

Is consciousness physical or metaphysical?

  • Consciousness is a kind of data processing and the brain is a machine that can be replicated in othe

    Votes: 81 86.2%

  • Consciousness requires a second substance outside the physical material world, currently undetectabl

    Votes: 3 3.2%

  • On Planet X, unconscious biological beings have perfected conscious machines

    Votes: 10 10.6%
  • Total voters
    94
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by Perpetual Student
Have you ever tried to elevate the amount of germanium in a computer chip to see what happens?
Click to expand...
Zeuzzz Good reply PS, im looking into it.

But first I have to ask you have you ever tried elevating the amount of endogenous DMT in your brain to see what happens?
Click to expand...


Zeuzzz said:
Non sequitur.

I asked you a specified question. Please reply.
Click to expand...
It's really quite simple. When any substance is required in ultra small quantities for some device to function, too much or too little of that substance will invariably degrade functionality. In fact, there is a point at which there will be no functionality at all. Similarly, there is ample evidence that overloading or depriving the human brain of any neurotransmitter/neuromodulator will degrade its functionality, hence: hallucinations or even worse.
I would never willfully allow my brain to be degraded as you suggest. However, it has been quite evident for some time now (on many threads) that you do not object to degrading your own brain's functionality.
 
tsig said:
It's what happens when the drug wears off.
Click to expand...
Some of you want to pretend perception is reality although most recognize it likely isn't. I.E. A shared hallucination albeit based on our interaction with photons and to a minor extent gravity. SFAWK, weak force and strong force are not involved with what we perceive.

The only drugs needed are what normal brain chemistry uses. What other throwaway line do you have to offer?
 
I used to take a lot of lsd.
I don't anymore.

In its defense, on that drug, I could do 8 hours of work in one hour; run through the forest at full speed; negotiate large river rapids, and score my highest level at Tetris.

Now, I drink.
I don't hallucinate.

But I never did.

Hallucinogens simply allowed me to see what I normally missed.

I miss that, but I lack the balls these days for that journey.
 
This is addressed to someone with real scientific knowledge on this:

Why do we hallucinate at all? Why do spontaneous firings of neurons, e.g. as on LSD or while dreaming, produce such rich content?
 
I would call lsd a significance amplifier.
More energy goes into perception.
I usually found that this excess was at the detriment of the digestive system.
it was mostly a rearrangement of normal energy flows.
 
Zeuzzz said:
Watch this 'banned' ted talk by Hancock. Really interesting information.

Click to expand...

Yeah, man.

I could find nothing offensive in what he was saying, nor anything non-scientific.
I'd even say he was right on.

That it was banned is almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

I loved the part about the cost of our last ridiculous war, and what a similar effort might have accomplished in terms of global warming.

We're hell bent to kiss-off the planet for our innate right to eat hamburgers.
It is truly embarrassing.
We are mentally retarded, collectively.

The main thing is to imprison people that chose to experiment with their own consciousness, whilst keeping the liberty of assault rifles.

Tim Leary has become something of a media joke, yet, he was actually quite brilliant. The politics of ecstasy was a very sane book. It had two rules:

You don't force anyone to change their state (don't slip drugs on someone) and you don't prevent anyone from exploring their own consciousness.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, our "liberal" president is cool with drones spying on us; killing civilians in other countries; violating the Geneva convention; hiring foxes to guard the chicken coop; etc.

We have truly lost our way.

Even here, at the heart-beat of rational discourse, there is a decided bias opposing sanity...or, at the least, ignoring and justifying the background insanity that will bring us to the brink of doom.

We have embraced a collective insanity, for the cheesy reward of sounding sane.

Pity, really.
 
PixyMisa said:
What part of it is interesting? No, wait, what part of it is information?
Click to expand...

The only interesting aspect is the demonstration that a charlatan can weave a tapestry of specious assertions in such a manner as to hook the gullible into believing he has uttered something scientific.
 
I took it as a philosophy talk, and a good one, too.
I thought he made a decent effort in avoiding any specific theory or Messianic complex.

I'm not sure what the complaint is here, regarding that video link above.

I may have to watch it again.
Perhaps I hallucinated the first viewing.


My sneaky suspicion is that the entire universe is woo.
It's all woo, all the way down.
From its inception to its predicted funeral, it's woo-woo.

Reality is woo.
Pedantic forms of reality are far more predictable and calculated.
They are woo-lite.


Um,
Did I ever mention that this thread needs to go to R&P, stat?.
 
AlBell said:
Some of you want to pretend perception is reality although most recognize it likely isn't. I.E. A shared hallucination albeit based on our interaction with photons and to a minor extent gravity. SFAWK, weak force and strong force are not involved with what we perceive.

The only drugs needed are what normal brain chemistry uses. What other throwaway line do you have to offer?
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of anyone here "pretend(ing) perception is reality."
What can be claimed is that our perceptions model reality. Over the millennia, humans we have developed numerous technologies and tools to confirm, fine tune and/or modify those models of reality (perceptions).
Calling our perceptions shared hallucinations is -- at best -- an abuse of language and -- at worst -- absurd.
 
Perpetual Student said:
The only interesting aspect is the demonstration that a charlatan can weave a tapestry of specious assertions in such a manner as to hook the gullible into believing he has uttered something scientific.
Click to expand...
As sociology, then? Fair enough. The study of human response to tripe is both interesting and of substantial practical value.... One way or another. ;)
 
quarky said:
Um,
Did I ever mention that this thread needs to go to R&P, stat?.
Click to expand...

The thread is an invitation to present scientific evidence for, or against, consciousness as data processing.

If a posting addresses only the philosophy and none of the scientific, then that posting, not the thread, needs mod action.
 
Mr. Scott said:
The thread is an invitation to present scientific evidence for, or against, consciousness as data processing.

If a posting addresses only the philosophy and none of the scientific, then that posting, not the thread, needs mod action.
Click to expand...

Really?

Sounds great.

Let's see some scientific evidence, so we won't have to drift into philosophy.
I haven't seen any, after all these pages.

Also, I failed to notice the 'data processing' caveat in the O.P.
 
Last edited:
The best science you will get it Rick Strassmans book about his DMT studies. Or you can watch this Hancock talk where he addresses it and why Strassman stopped the research as the results were spooking him out so much.
 
Perpetual Student said:
It's really quite simple. When any substance is required in ultra small quantities for some device to function, too much or too little of that substance will invariably degrade functionality. In fact, there is a point at which there will be no functionality at all. Similarly, there is ample evidence that overloading or depriving the human brain of any neurotransmitter/neuromodulator will degrade its functionality, hence: hallucinations or even worse.
I would never willfully allow my brain to be degraded as you suggest. However, it has been quite evident for some time now (on many threads) that you do not object to degrading your own brain's functionality.
Click to expand...


Yes the evil brain chemicals are battling with the good ones in an attempt to return to homeostasis :rolleyes:
 
Sideroxylon said:
The part about getting off your chops and receiving life coaching from a goddess?
Click to expand...


If you were to personify earth as a sentient entity what gender would you choose?

There is a good reason why people call her mother nature, not father nature. The essence of the DMT experience is a very female one is all I can say, Strasssman has collected voluminous numerous data on these recurring themes between disparate test subjects, that recounted strikingly similar experiences and themes yet never met each other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom