JORDAN PETERSON UTTERLY BTFO'D IN AI DEBATE Posted on October 16, 2022 by Anonymous oh no no petersonbros, did we get too cocky?
I also defeated an imaginary Albert Einstein on a debate while drinking coffee this morning.
>As a neurobiologist/biopsychologist, Jordan Peterson statement around nine minutes about what consciousness neurophysiological he is and doesn't brain is one of the most profound things I've ever heard in my life
a youtube neurobiologist/biopsychologist. What language is he speaking here ?
I'm not giving you free views. What were his points?
peterson claimed consciousness is computable
What does that mean, exactly?
No idea what JP's position is and I'm not wasting my time watching Kermit babble.
In the most general sense, physicalism. Consciousness is not magic or separate from the rest of reality. It seems like that from the inside, but that's observer bias. I will for the life of me, never understand why this isn't obvious and can only guess that people don't like that they don't have a soul and disbelieve it.
>It seems like that from the inside, but that's observer bias.
"What I observe and measure cannot be true because Materialism Man told me so."
Is your claim that the models we form from measuring reality are necessarily true?
You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of underdone potato.
You deterministically attempted to convince me of determinism, hoping against foregone conclusions that I would change my deterministic mind to believe you instead of the views I'm programmed to hold.
You're the one introducing non-evidentiary additional bits of complexity to the model by pretending there's something magic going on.
Non locality implies some sort of magic, or metaphysical, whatever word you prefer.
it means that you can simulate consciousness, a thing that would make the simulation hypothesis of the universe more plausible if proven.
How can that even be proved? How can you prove consciousness? Ye I know it's real, but you can't prove it.
>a thing that would make the simulation hypothesis of the universe more plausible if proven
no, the whole bullshit of consciousness being tightly related to the universe comes from misinterpretation of quantum mechanics after years of telling people that "observing a particle forces its wave function to collapse" or whatever terribly vulgarization pop-sci youtubers have been spreading around.
>you can simulate consciousness
>that would make the simulation hypothesis of the universe more plausible
so? whether that's true or not is still not decided and likely won't be for a very long time
there's no right or wrong here (yet), just because some garden gnometuber thinks that one is true is meaningless
>so? whether that's true or not is still not decided and likely won't be for a very long time
It could never be decided in his favor even if it was true. Computation schizos are legit retarded.
>even if he was right he'd be wrong
That's not what I said. Is your dogma so fragile you have to resort to this kind of garden gnomery?
idk man just seems like you are allergic to the idea of entertaining a thought, its not provable, doesn't mean its not plausible or improbable
so yeah cringe
>peterson claimed consciousness is computable
Holy fuck, this makes me lose all respect for Peterson. He's literally a midwit and intellectually on par with the very people he claims to be fighting. There is really no hope for modern acadummia anymore.
probably is with some extremely advanced, out of reach technology, but how would could one ever prove it's real consciousness?
You walking in a desert and you come accros a tortoise laying on it's back its belly baking in the hot sun
is self organization consciousness?
Peterson isn't a computer scientist so this doesn't surprise me
I haven't watched this vid but I've heard Penrose argue that if consciousness were computable then sufficiently large integers would be conscious which is hard to argue against
Why is it not?
if it's quantifiable it's computable
Peterson is incapable of not getting btfo when speaking to anyone who isn't retarded
Example and link?
this old hag has been saying this for years with zero proof. just notice how dodgy he gets when he gets questioned about his views. he is constantly trying to suggest panpsychism without explicitly saying it
All fundamental parts of the brain are computable, the only way consciousnesses isn't computable is if it's outside the human body.
I'm glad Einstein died so we don't have to listen to his uninformed garbage takes on "quantum consciousness"