RE: What If the World Is Arranged Differently Than We Think?
Well, I realize there's a lot we don't know, but it's very hard to accept the idea that rocks and sand have some level of consciousness. Nevertheless, the theory itself, as well as research, seemed interesting to me.
I agree. Very interesting. This ties in with two of my articles:
- The Reality Illusion; and
- Useful beats truthful: Survival and repetition of ideas in the information ecosystem
Both of those articles reference work by another researcher from the University of California (Irvine, though, not Santa Barbara), Donald Hoffman. Hoffman takes it a step further and argues that matter is a fundamental property of consciousness. If I understand his argument, he'd say it's not that rocks "have" consciousness, but rather that consciousness constructs the rocks as abstractions during the act of perception.
I clicked through to your source at The Conversation. It's funny how almost every article that anyone ever writes about consciousness opens with a reference to David Chalmers.
From that article,
The central thesis of our approach is this: the particular linkages that allow for large-scale consciousness – like those humans and other mammals enjoy – result from a shared resonance among many smaller constituents. The speed of the resonant waves that are present is the limiting factor that determines the size of each conscious entity in each moment.
I think this is especially interesting in the context of Neuralink implants, and it leads to a question that I have wondered about for a long time. What happens when you can use implants to directly link two or three or 100 brains? Do they gain no improvement, additive improvement, or multiplicative improvement (or something else)?
Just finished reading your post Useful beats truthful: Survival and repetition of ideas in the information ecosystem. I never thought about it, but it really is. Now Ukraine is not only a battlefield of two armies, but also an informational battlefield. Every day we are bombarded with thousands of informational messages, most of which are false or not entirely true. Everyone tries to tell his own truth, which is beneficial to him. We even have organizations that specialize in refuting fakes. It is a very difficult job to look for evidence of the falsity of certain reports. But despite the refutation, false information often lives for years if it is very beneficial to someone.
It is worth noting that now some regions of the country actually live in a different reality, since their information field supports only one point of view. It can also be an example that our reality can be different if we imagine it differently.
Yes, at one time his ideas gained considerable popularity. He is like a pop star in science.
A very interesting question. Could it become something like a biological supercomputer?
Exactly. In the video I linked to, even the woman doing the introduction called him, "a rock star".
I intentionally dodged controversial topics in the article, but it's that way in the US too. Many people seem to live in "information bubbles" where they are totally unaware that alternate points of view even exist. True or not, they only receive and spread the information that is believed to be useful to their own political point of view.
This is something that I have long suspected, but only time will tell. I am definitely curious to see the results.