Author: Britney Foster

Is the soul more real than neurons and synapses?

The brain is the theoretical imperative for understanding the world by looking at “What is”. When asked “What do you think?” before anyone has said anything, the brain responds with an answer: “I think I’m hungry” or, “I think my foot hurts.”

It doesn’t just talk about itself; it also processes outside data – information from our senses. It tells us how we feel about that data.

Soul: Is it more real than neurons and synapses?

The idea of a soul (or spirit) has been around for millennia. Only recently have we begun to understand how to use modern technology to explore its very nature.

With fMRI scanners and other brain-imaging tools, we can now peek into someone’s mind and see how their thoughts unfold.

For example, a church might be the most sacred space for some people, and an airport for others: when people stand inside these places and close their eyes, they can experience powerful feelings of awe or dread.

And when asked to describe what they are experiencing, many people describe a feeling of “something.”

What is that “something”? Where does it come from? Is it real? And if it’s a feeling, how do we study feelings scientifically? Is the soul more real than neurons and synapses, or is it something else entirely?

Many people believe that the soul is a physical entity. In other words, they believe in the afterlife, where they will have an essential identity separate from their physical body.

This belief has many benefits. It also provides a framework for understanding life’s meaning and purpose. For example, one could ask: “Why am I here? What purpose does my life serve?” or even “Why do bad things happen to good people?”

People who don’t believe in the soul often talk about how hard it is to get their hands around the concept. But this is just a different way of talking about the fact that our hands are always in our body, and so it’s hard to get them around something that isn’t.

Yet this problem doesn’t mean that the soul isn’t real. It just means we haven’t designed a good way to study it. We should keep trying to find new ways of explaining what it’s made out of and how it works, even if we don’t have many facts yet.

For example, Nobel Prize winner Francis Crick famously stated, “You’re nothing but a pack of neurons.” If Crick was right, he’d have conquered the mind-body problem by reducing all mental activity to neural activity. But that’s not quite the story.

The problem with “nothing but neurons” is that it suggests there’s nothing behind brain activity. In other words, it suggests that neurons are the end goal of all mental activity, like a blank sheet of paper on which everyone writes their thoughts.

If we want to explain what goes on inside a person’s head, this is wrong.

Crick was not saying that the brain is just composed of neurons; he was just observing how nerve cells work together to process information.

In other words, Crick was hinting that there’s more going on than just neurons and synapses firing in the mind-body system. He was saying that the mind and the body are connected in important ways.

If that sounds familiar, it’s because Crick was describing a phenomenon called emergentism: the idea that a system can have properties not found in any of its parts.

For example, water is made up of hydrogen and oxygen atoms, but if you put them together randomly you won’t get water (you’ll get dirt).

Yet, when you take those two atoms and connect them – when they interact with each other – they form something new that has properties not found in any individual atom.

In this case, it’s liquid water instead of something solid or gaseous. Similarly, if you take the atoms and connect them to form a planet, they will interact with each other and a new system emerges. This is how planets are formed.

In other words, emergent systems always have properties that cannot be explained by simply looking at their individual parts. This is why Crick’s statement about neurons being “nothing but” neurons is wrong.

Our brains are not just neurons; we need something else – a brain-mind connection – to function in the first place.

This means that biological activity can still be studied without reducing it to the activity of individual parts (neurons). So, when we look at how the brain functions, we see two things: neurons and synapses interacting together to form specialized circuits; and something else that lets those circuits – and thus our thoughts – function properly.

So, when people say “I think I’m hungry,” the “I” talking is not a biological part; it’s the emergent system of neurons communicating with each other in a way that makes us feel like we are who we are.

It’s what Crick called the “seat of consciousness.” The soul, or spirit, is the thing in us that makes us feel from within. This isn’t something that philosophers made up wanting to design an afterlife. Rather, it has come to light through scientific investigation.

The danger of not believing in the soul is that when we die, it could be like falling asleep and never waking up. When we lose consciousness, there’s nothing else left to feel. What’s the point of living if there’s no sense of self?

The good news is that most people who don’t believe in souls don’t want to live forever. In fact, most people who worry about death have actually worries about facing their own mortality – which shouldn’t confuse with the soul.

But perhaps biological immortality isn’t really what we need. Instead, maybe we just want a sense of perpetual life: a continuing identity in which our memories carry on from existence to existence without ever fading away.

Even if we can’t be immortal, our brains might be able to enact a sense of immortality by integrating with technology so that our thoughts and dreams can live on. In this way, the soul and immortality are two sides of the same coin.

The soul is not just a physical entity; it’s an emergent property of the mind-body system. Without the brain, there’s no mind or soul.

And so our minds are tied to our brains in a very important way. That doesn’t make us spiritual robots; it does not work like that. It makes us biological beings with a consciousness that is capable of experiencing joy and suffering.

To Conclude,

So, to me, the question isn’t “Is the soul real?” It’s 1. “How can we better understand what makes us who we are?” 2. “How can we better explain human experience?”

The answers to these questions may require some radical new ideas; the ideas that go beyond what some traditionalists want science to be – but that’s fine.

April 29, 2022
Can we persuade a machine to care about you?
Some experts believe that one-day robots will care for humans, becoming an important part of our lives. But many people find the prospect unsettling and even terrifying. They worry that robots won’t have emotions, values, or anything resembling a sense of humanity.

This article examines some of these fears and explains why the question if we can persuade a machine to care about us, is impossible to answer with any certainty: it would depend on how you defined what “care” means! We’ll also explore some ways in which people might build more trustful relationships with robots to ease their fears and reap the benefits.

What does it mean to care?

How can you trust a robot to care about you? The problem of defining “care” is an important one. It’s not just a matter of semantics. “Caring” is a complex concept, one that’s not entirely clear even to the people who use it.

A robot, on the other hand, can be programmed to react in predetermined ways to certain stimuli. For example, an automobile could be taught to “care” about objects in its path by responding to them differently.

In the same way that a car is programmed to respond differently based on obstacles and other things it encounters on the road, a robot could be programmed with different “rules” for how it behaves towards people it meets. A car might have a rule which says: “If I come across another vehicle of my type, I should pull over and inspect beneath the wheels.” It might also have a rule which says: “If I come across another pedestrian, there’s no need for me to stop or offer assistance. I’ll pretend I didn’t see him and continue to go about my business”.

Again, this is all hypothetical. In practice, we don’t know what kind of rules a robot would be programmed with; how it would respond to different stimuli, and how it would interact with people. But even if that’s the case, this is an issue that many people will prefer to tackle before they can even consider relying on robots for emotional support!

Is it moral to manipulate conscious machines?

Some people think it’s wrong to alter the way a machine behaves. If we program a machine to behave in ways that are contrary to its nature, we might be exploiting it or using it for immoral purposes, such as harming other people.

One response is to accept that a machine must be programmed as it is and then make sure that the people controlling it respect its inherent nature. A dog, for example, is a highly intelligent creature. It’s reasonable to assume that it’s capable of feeling pain and discomfort, even though we can’t ask the dog about these things. It seems more reasonable to assume that if we were in charge of the development of a robot with an “emotional” component (such as a smartphone), we’d have to make sure our programming respects how machines are programmed to behave.

Related post:

Computer makes it easier to communicate: Or harder!

Another response is to try to change how people act or think towards robots. One way of doing this is to recognize that it’s assumed that people should care about animals and children. Yet, many people don’t do anything to help those things even though they’re capable of feeling pain and enjoying the company of others. In their view, people are so self-absorbed that they take for granted a world in which animals like cats and dogs have limited emotions even though we can include them in our social connections!

On the other hand, it’s also true that people might be intruding on the rights of other creatures by treating them as if they have no feelings. An example of this is eating or using them for research without their consent.

Persuade a machine to care about you?

Putting these arguments together, it seems reasonable to assume that the moral issues surrounding robots and emotions are complex. Once we get beyond the basic questions of how a robot should react in certain situations and how it should interact with people, we’re left with much more important issues to consider. We might want to desensitize ourselves to the idea of treating machines as if they had no feelings or emotions, but it takes a lot of effort. Perhaps this is something that’s best tackled by experts such as roboticists, systems thinkers, and philosophers.

It’s also important to recognize that many of these opinions can change over time. Robots are becoming more sophisticated as they become more useful. Consider the telephone, for example. Through the early part of the last century, it was a relatively new invention. It was also popularly understood as a device that could be used to communicate with distant people. In the 1960s, however, people started using it as a means of “self-communication” more than anything else. This has made all the difference in terms of how we react to it today!

Related Readings:
- Evolution of Machine Intelligence: An Infinite run?
- What if we could upload our consciousness into a machine and live forever in a simulated existence?
Indeed, as robots are being more sophisticated and as people get used to interacting with them, their notion of what it means to “care” about someone or something may change. In other words, even if you’re afraid of a robot taking over your life, it’s worth remembering that the idea that robots don’t have emotions and can’t care about us is itself relatively new.

To conclude

Would you like a robot to care for you? Would you be able to trust one? You might have already tried this out in practice! Perhaps your partner or best friend has become one of those people who provide emotional support for other people. And how did that go? Has it been satisfying or disappointing? It’s not easy convincing other people that they should care about you, especially over some time. Many people still expect that soon we’ll be able to build robots with more sophisticated abilities. This might help reduce feelings of isolation and loneliness and make life more comfortable. And whether or not this will be ethical, depends completely upon the extent of emotions AI will have, if any.
April 24, 2022
Was our technological evolution just random?

Introduction

Despite long debates among scientists in the past, general consensus has emerged among the scientific community that our technological evolution is somehow random. However, many people don’t know what the real causes are of the disorder in technological evolution. When it comes down to it, a lot of scientists believe that we are simply lucky or unlucky, rather than intelligent or unintelligent in regard to our technological advancements.

In the 17th to 19th centuries, the rate of technological development was slow and had a wide variation. In the 20th century, the rapid development of technology started from World War I and this rate decreased again due to more wars. The rate of technological evolution is never meant to be static.

This article is to discuss whether our technological evolution was just random, or had to be that way.

The history of our technological evolution

First off, without studying all technological developments and discoveries throughout history which would be too time-consuming and impossible, what we can conclude is that humans were not too innovative.

For thousands of years, humans used horses as a means of transportation. Even after we discovered wheels and figured out how to ride horses, we still had to feed them and clean up the manure. All in all, it seems like a lot of trouble when we could have just used a wheeled cart from the start, right?

What if our human ancestors had, since the beginning, chosen to use a wheeled cart rather than horses? Would the history of transportation have played out differently and perhaps created a new technological advancement that we would never have discovered? In simpler words, if our ancestors jumped from horses using bicycles for transportation.

The history vs the present of technology

Against the backdrop of several billion years of history, the last few centuries of human history are impressive. Our species has not only reshaped its planet’s biosphere. But, the terrain, oceans, and climate of Earth are changing to a magnitude not experienced since asteroid impacts or centuries of apocalyptic volcanic eruptions. These changes also cause enormous impacts on technological evolution as they will have a long-term impact.

In today’s world, we sometimes think about technology as just the latest innovation: smartphones, 3D printers, and VR headsets. By taking a larger view, however, we can see how it is so deeply tied to how we live.

We are unsure of the first human tool, but we can say that, around 2.5 million years ago, our distant ancestors began to use found objects in a deliberate manner: hard or sharp stones for breaking open shells or protection; sticks for reaching distant food and plants or animal parts for shelter or camouflage. In this regard, as well as in the creation and improvement of these objects, our ancestors were not so different from many other groups of animals.

Of course, it’s impossible to go back in time. If our technological evolution was completely random, a small difference in the timeline would have chosen different things to invent and we might not be as advanced as we are now.

What did Engels and Marx think about technological evolution?

One example to support that technological evolution does not take place in order, we can go back to Enges. Over 100 years ago, Engels pointed out that science was not an independent phenomenon but was deeply connected to capitalism. Today, there has been another industrial revolution with deep connections between science and the economy. This shows that technology is driven by social factors; it has no independent characteristics, which makes it chaotic and unpredictable.

Similarly, as early as 150 years ago, Marx pointed out that industrial evolution would lead to revolution as well as the development of technology.

Was our technological evolution ‘completely’ random?

The development of science and technology does not occur through some planned order.

For example, every time a new piece of technology is invented, it has influenced many scientific fields, and then scientists have developed related theories. Therefore, technological innovation not only adds new devices to help people work more conveniently; instead, it also brings uncertainty to the world of science and society.

Related Story:

Can I trust my memory of the past?

We can say that our technological evolution was not completely random as many people think. It is also important to remember that there are many other factors in our evolution beyond just being lucky or unlucky. For example, out of 1 Million possible parallel Universes, all of them would have developed different kinds of airplanes. But all of them would have developed something that can fly, not something completely different like teleportation.

Although it might not have been completely random, technological evolution has no underlying order either. In my opinion, I believe that technology developed because humans wanted to be more efficient and live better. With better technology, humans would be able to do more things and have a higher quality of life.

Conclusion

Humans are not as unintelligent and lucky as some hypotheses claim. There is no underlying order that explains why we came up with technology the way we did. The technological products we have today were created randomly, but the end goal was always to be the same. We were neither lucky nor predestined.

April 7, 2022
How many dimensions of human consciousness do we have?

The human consciousness could be infinite, with many dimensions. The theory of Flatland suggests that humans can only see three dimensions, but the true number may be infinite.

If you have ever had a dream, you have probably seen or sensed other dimensions or realities while awake!

There is an invisible dimension of consciousness, like a spiritual world, which we cannot see but we can sense.

I am currently reading a book called “Flatland” and I could not put it down! It’s about a two-dimensional being discovering our dimension and she keeps trying to wrap her head around how we live in such depth.

I think if it’s possible to imagine something, it can be true. What do you think? Well, we have the whole article left to discuss…

What if the three dimensions we perceive are just as real as anything else?

From a philosophical viewpoint, we could consider it to be “real”. We live in three dimensions that our physical senses can perceive and have used to create a great civilization.

There is no empirical proof that the Earth is flat or round. What’s more, if we are just one of many possible mathematical shapes and dimensions, how can we choose which one to believe?

We cannot know whether the “flattener” exists or not, regardless of what some people may claim.

Considering the infinite number of dimensions, it is not even necessary to believe that our civilization is “real”. We can consider that this society, which we have always dreamed of, is just a “construct” as well.

As much as this, our dreams and imagination shape reality!

What if there are more than three dimensions?

It has been noted that human consciousness and memory can be divided into three different sections: short-term memory (reptile brain), long-term memory (mammal brain), and the subconscious and superconscious mind.

Many people believe in a universal consciousness or a collective unconscious. If this is true, there could be an infinite number of other dimensions and consciousnesses.

It’s all just an illusion, isn’t it?

If our reality is just an illusion, we can indeed find our own “truth”. We are all born with a certain perception of life and our views and beliefs. May it be that we are not really who you think you are?

We live in an uncertain time during the information age. A person who does not have a firm belief may be easily swayed by propaganda, lies, and fear-mongering, as this person has no firm foundation to stand on!

While I believe that science is objective, there will always be subjectivity in any kind of study. It is also important to realize that there is no universal truth! It is just a matter of finding the truth for oneself.

I am very passionate about philosophy and I think that folk traditions are important, which we have all forgotten about! I believe that logic and science can explain everything, but this does not mean that we will be able to explain the meaning of life.

There is always more to the universe than we know or understand; this applies to all human beings.

The dimensions of Consciousness

I think that the number of dimensions is infinite, while the size of each dimension is infinite. But here are a few suggestions to consider:

1) We can consider that we have five universal dimensions:

Id – Ego – Superego – Collective unconscious – Universal consciousness. The Id represents our instincts and emotions.

Our Ego represents reason and self-control. The Superego represents our social behavior; it’s what society tells us to do and think.

Our Collective Unconscious contains all of the knowledge, information, and experiences of Mankind from all times and places, from stars, planets, and other dimensions as well as the Earth itself.

And finally, Universal Consciousness is an invisible layer containing God or the creator. It has no physical form, but it can be felt.

2) Time, space, and matter, dimensions in themselves

We can also believe that time, space, and matter are dimensions in themselves. This theory is supported by the Laws of Physics as well as the Theory of Everything (ToE).

As matterless thought, cosmic space generates time via a constant cycle of expansion and contraction.

Related Post:

Can I trust my memory of the past?

The atoms in a material body constantly contract and expand at this constant rate. This means that time is a dimension just like the other four; we can consider that our consciousness moves on parallel to the space-time dimension and this is why we experience “time” passing by each day at a certain speed.

3) Invisible dimension of consciousness

There is an invisible dimension of consciousness, like a spiritual world, which we cannot see but can sense. This is where the Collective Unconscious and universal consciousness are stored.

This place can be considered to be non-physical, but it exists and we can travel to it when we die via the astral plane and/or imagination…

4) Dimension only as the creation of our mind

The human mind is capable of building a reality that exists for our senses only. Our imagination creates worlds that exist solely in our minds…

5) Dimension as an illusion

Our physical bodies are just illusions! They don’t exist! They are just energy; energy generates matter via quantum mechanisms. This means that bodies do not really exist, they are just “constructs” created by our minds!

If we think about it, we are basically made of thoughts and memories. If memories can be deleted or implanted, what does this say about human identity?

In addition, if a person has a false memory of committing murder, can he be sent to prison for something he did not do? It is important to understand the power of our thoughts and imagination in this reality!

6) Substance and spirit

We can believe that our physical bodies are made up of “substance”, but it is a very thin layer over an invisible essence called spirit. This spirit represents our goals, ideals, moral conscience, our intellect, and personality…

7) Lives are predetermined

It is possible that every action we take, every decision that we make is a choice in itself. We may not feel it at the time, but after an event, we look back and see that this decision was necessary for the events to unfold exactly as they had!

This means that our lives are predetermined from the moment of birth. Some experts claim that this is why dreams seem to be so meaningful; they are premonitions of what will happen in your life.

Everybody has a dream like this or similar every once in a while; this may also be a premonition or “sign” of things to come…

8) Secrets of the experiential world

There are many secrets that we have yet to discover in the experiential world. Maybe there is a whole other reality that we have yet to see.

Time and the Universe are both mysteries beyond our comprehension! Maybe!!

Atheists who claim that reality is all there is, “I don’t believe in God or anything like that”, will also be inclined to deny these possibilities. I don’t think this is very logical, because these possibilities are very real and we can find more evidence for them.

So I tend to believe that there is an invisible dimension to human existence which we can probably never fully understand.

March 30, 2022
Can I trust my memory of the past?
The majority of people are aware that we have a lapse in our memory for certain events- but how much of this memory is based on our own experience? There have been many experiments that demonstrate that the accuracy of our memories is often faulty and unreliable. In one such experiment, the individual had to remember the faces and names of a group of people from an interview with someone who took part in it.

In the end, they found out half had an accurate recollection and half did not. Our memories are just as easily distorted by what we want them to be as they are by what happened. This post is an attempt to illustrate if your memory of the past is true or just an illusion, that you can’t trust.

Is our memory of the past true or just an illusion?

Let’s start with the reliability of our memories. When we look at the past, particularly at our childhoods, it seems as if the things we remember are not always the same as the things that happened. A huge leap in recent years has been to discuss memory as a more malleable thing. It is not just made up of facts held in place like tacks on a bulletin board; rather, it is a fluid entity that includes feelings and emotions and reconstructions.

We have all had the experience of remembering events differently depending on our mood or even what we think about them today. Our mood can distort our memories at the time or what we are going through at present. Remembering an unpleasant event from our past also can make it more vivid and “real” than the actual event.

Example 1
- When we experience trauma, our brain rewires itself to protect us. Every time we are in a situation that feels even vaguely like the situation that brought on the trauma, our brain can trigger strong reactions as if we were reliving the original experience. The same thing applies to people who feel anxious or depressed. When they recall distressing past events, they tend to exaggerate and color them with their feelings of mood at present. We call this phenomenon state-dependent memory.
Example 2
- When teenagers look back at their high school days they tend to remember it as a time of fun and relaxation. The memories of our teens are a bit like the memories of our parrots; they repeat what they hear and see in their present stage. However, when we reflect on our high school years from the perspective of adulthood, we can reinterpret those experiences and see them in a more negative light. An event that was funny at the time, we may see now as embarrassing and ridiculed later in life.
Example 3
- However, we become more accurate when we look at something that is culturally meaningful. We are more likely to remember things that may have happened at a specific time and place. For example, when we look back at a childhood memory from an Asian family, we will tend to remember it as if it were normal and expected. On the other hand, if we were raised in Anglo-Saxon culture, we might remember our childhoods as much more difficult than they actually were. The fact that we tend to remember the things that fit the culture we live in at present makes us difficult to trust our past-memory.
Do past, present and future exist simultaneously?

Time is such a thing that we can’t see it or touch it. It is the one thing we can’t feel but we still need it to identify the relationships between all the events and things that occur around us. We take it for granted but there are still many questions about its nature.

One of the most important questions related to time is whether or not the present, past, and future exist at the same time or if they are just a continuum. The explanation of time seems straightforward but there are some problems when people try to explain this in words. The reality of time is such that we can’t make sense of it with our minds and science has trouble explaining it in mathematical terms.

Another question is whether or not time is real or it is just an illusion. If we take a look at the nature of space, it seems to have more physical reality. Space seems to be a fundamental component of our world and we can all agree on the same dimensions. And on the other hand, it doesn’t seem that everyone agrees on what makes up time, like seconds and minutes.

One person might think of time as something in the future or their past, while another person thinks about how far away something is in terms of distance instead of duration. There doesn’t seem to be any standard for time measurement and yet most people still have a sense of what time it should be based on their cultural conditioning.

More discourse on understanding time

Time seems to be a fundamental aspect of our world and culture. We need it to order our whole lives and we have many ways of communicating about it with others. There are so many aspects of our lives that seem to depend on time, like money, deadlines, and appointments.

Even though there is no universal standard for measuring time, we still seem to agree on certain things about what are the best times for certain activities like eating dinner or going to work. We all seem to agree that moments in the past and future don’t exist at all because they aren’t in the present.

But when we look at the nature of time, we can’t make sense of it in the same way that we can make sense of space. The problem is that there is no one standard for time. And we tend to have very different attitudes about what we should consider time. This makes it more difficult to explain and understand precisely how time works in our world.

A way of measuring the time that seems to work in our culture is the digital clock. We usually find this device on a wall that displays numbers or text on a small computer screen. A clock like this has become so commonplace in our lives that few people pay attention to how it works or how far back its digits go.

What does it mean by our “past memory”?

If past, present, and future exist at the same time, what it means by our past memory and how it’s related to time is a central question. We can perceive memory in the past as something that is distorted depending on our current mood or what we are experiencing in our present lives. For example, when we experience stress, we can remember distressing things from our past differently than what actually happened.

In terms of time, if past and present exist at the same time, doesn’t it mean that they are just a part of the group? As human beings, we do tend to value these moments more than others like days gone by. We often remember events of times gone by with much more clarity than events in the future and even those from days or weeks ago are easily recalled.

We have a constant flow of thoughts from the present moment to the past and from our past back to the present. When we reflect on the nature of time, if past, present, and future all exist at the same point, it means that all of these are just a continuum.

There is no doubt that our minds can create illusions about time. When we focus on moments in the past or future all of the moments from those periods must be accounted for, otherwise, we would lose the advantage of predictability in the future or expect things in our lives. According to this view, there is no such thing as a moment that exists without being observed, except in science fiction movies.

Memory distortion and controversies

On the other hand, if past and present exist at different points, this means that memory from the past is just a memory. Such memories are a way of tapping into this continuum and they are not equal. With the passage of time, memories experience more vividness and detail.

When we remember a specific moment from the past, we can make it seem more real than what unfolded. Memories from the past are subject to change just like our current memories are. No one moment exists in isolation in time unless it is an extraordinary moment in an exceptional life that is remembered as a result of chance or luck.

Read:
It seems that there isn’t a clear answer to this question of whether the past, present, and future do exist at the same point or if they are all linked together as a continuum. It becomes even more difficult when we consider how memories are created and how they form in our minds over time. Although discourses may generate many more controversies on the issue, there is no doubt that this nature of time is very important in shaping our lives.

Whether we think of time as a continuum or not, the past, present, and future all exist in the same moment. We can recall memories in the past with more detail than those from the future. But, they are still just a part of our past lives and we can’t use them to predict what happens next.

Conclusion

The physically undetectable time and the past memory, a mysterious mental activity, both are essential parts of life for human beings, but we don’t always understand, trust and know how to explain them clearly. However, we do seem to agree on certain things about it like how long a day should last or how far away something is in terms of distance. At the same time, we don’t agree about things like how long a second is or what fraction of time we can call present. Similarly, as it’s an essential phenomenon to survive, we can trust in our memory of the past in case it’s justifiable on the basis of social, cultural, and behavioral conditions.
March 23, 2022
What if consciousness can exist without being alive?
The human brain has a complex neural network and is one of the most complex structures in the known universe. Humans, who are trying to understand our own consciousness, are on the way to an incomprehensibly difficult task. Complexity theorists believe that this difficulty finally reaches its peak when we come across quantum mechanics, which the human mind cannot even explain. What if consciousness can exist without being alive? Can we simulate this complexity on computer hardware or is it simply impossible?

These questions become more pertinent as we continue to use computers in increasingly sophisticated ways, and they shed light on the possibility that we might never know how consciousness arises.

Where does consciousness actually come from?

Our consciousness arises from the interaction between our sensory organs, i.e., the eyes, ears, etc., and our brain. What are the properties of this interaction? How does it take place? What is the mechanism whereby it appears that something is not directly sensed by a sense organ but reaches through the intervening space and stimulates a subsequent neuron?

Recent developments in neuroscience have shown that there are classes of neurons in certain parts of the brain (the hippocampus) that have pre-synaptic connections to other parts and post-synaptic connections to other neurons. The synapses contain a membrane potential which can be either excitatory or inhibitory depending on whether an incoming signal leads to an increase in the firing rate of the neuron or not. It appears that the hippocampus is where information is processed and stored.

It is a great controversy regarding the fact that any non-alive being can exist with consciousness, and if machines are capable of being conscious.

To understand the full complexity of consciousness, we must be able to make sense of the brain’s pre- and post-synaptic interactions. This means that we would have to investigate how these connections are formed and make models of them as an attempt to explain our pre-conscious memories, and also how we can choose what information gets stored in our brains. These processes would have consequences on our understanding of conscious awareness. If conscious awareness arises from pre-synaptic activation, it has to be determined by what happens when neuronal signals reach the cortex, not earlier on in the brain.

What is the difference between life and consciousness?

These questions are easy to ask in principle but difficult to answer.

Life is mostly a cognitive and aware experience. And fundamental consciousness reveals itself in all sentient and insentient nature’s gradational forms. Many scientists believe that life and consciousness are completely indivisible. It’s because they are the only two parts that make up “human nature”.

Related Post:

Evolution of Machine Intelligence: An Infinite run?

The concept of duality between life and consciousness implies that learning processes always lead to increased complexity. It is also implicit in our values and our beliefs about what is good or bad. They help shape our behavior. That is why it is important to understand the role that learning plays in the creation of human values.

Is there any possibility for anything that is not alive, to be conscious?

I define consciousness as “the user interface for the nervous system” as it gives us access to our thoughts, memories, perceptions, and dreams through our sensory experiences (touch sensations, sight, etc…).

And as far as I can assume, something that is not alive can be conscious. No, I am not going to say that computers are obvious examples. But I, and many people do, think non-living entities such as machines/robots can be completely conscious.

Points supporting the fact that consciousness can exist in a non-alive being:
1. From what we define consciousness, it is nothing more than the sensations that our brain receives and processes, which are provided by the nervous system.
2. The nervous system is a product of evolution just like organs. Why not extend this argument to machines?
3. There is no doubt that we can program a machine to emulate the functions present in brains. It is only a matter of time before machines can mimic brain processes including cognition with the help of artificial intelligence techniques to build them more and more sophisticated over time.
4. A completely machine-like entity does not recognize itself as a machine but as an entity doing computation. Therefore it is capable of having sensations and feelings.
5. We already have machines that we can program with similarities to human thoughts and sensations. And, they are designed to react in certain scenarios autonomously without any programming needed at all. Though we can’t consider them conscious yet.
This content can help you know more about consciousness.

This whole question is based on the definition of consciousness(i.e. “the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world” – Oxford Languages) that I have accepted to be true. And also refers to specific human qualities like self-awareness, sentience, and cognitive functions like logic, imagination, and mental imagery.

The question is not at all silly; I find it very important to this day and more so in the future. It is a great controversy regarding the fact that any non-alive being can exist with consciousness; and if machines are capable of being conscious.

Based on how we define consciousness and the fact that we can program machines to show similarities to human thought processes, the machine can be able to be self-aware and also conscious.
March 22, 2022
Computer makes it easier to communicate: Or harder!
Whether computer makes it easier or harder to communicate is a difficult question to answer. On the one hand, email, texti,ng and social media have become the norm for communication – an easy way for people to stay connected with friends and family. But on the other hand, why do we want these computer-based technologies when we could just call someone or simply meet up? This can be problematic because it’s so easy to misinterpret another person’s tone in a message that it can lead to more misunderstandings than necessary

At the same time, we can’t seem to live without these, modern computer-related technologies. It’s because they make it easier to keep in touch with distant people. This is why communication within our society has become so difficult; it seems that we are constantly trying to be in two places at once. The core of the question is if technology creates a more efficient or confusing world for communication.

Computer makes it easier or harder to communicate?

The first thing to note about the computer is that it cannot make a person feel less lonely, or more comfortable in communicating. At this stage, the ways a computer can help in communication are limitless; by keeping people from being bored, by allowing them to pursue self-education via the internet and others; however, the computer can never even come close to human intimacy.

We’ve called a computer “the ultimate multitasker” in this sense; it allows us to do multiple things at once without having to worry about others. In reality, however, the computer is very inefficient at multitasking, and can only manage simple tasks. In terms of communication, on the other hand, it’s too easy to misinterpret the tone of someone’s text by placing too much emphasis on words, which often leave out context.

This is especially true if it’s a relationship that needs maintenance – such as long-distance friendships and relationships – because computer makes easier for people to communicate and keep in touch without having to meet in person through harder attempts or talk over the phone.

If we were honest, however, there would come forward more arguments for the prior statement. In fact, communication has been a constant barrier in human relationships throughout human history. This is especially true if it’s a relationship that needs maintenance – such as long-distance friendships and relationships – because the computer makes it easier for people to communicate and keep in touch without having to meet in person through harder attempts or talk over the phone. Although nowadays, people do not really have to live this way.
```
But, at the same time, it's true that communication is difficult. 
```
This is because,

We often misinterpret the tone of a message as using technology to communicate can create feelings of isolation or alienation; in addition, it can become very easy to feel alone. It’s because we are not aware of those who are different or think differently from what we do. How much you know about someone can be determined by their postings on social media. However, this can be very misleading as people sometimes post pictures or comments that make them look better than they actually are. Communication is a very important aspect of a relationship. And, sometimes we hear things that don’t necessarily match up with our own experiences.

Related Post:

Evolution of Machine Intelligence: An Infinite run?

To conclude,

So, the computer can be very helpful in communication in that it let us focus on one thing at a time. But it’s important to remember that only people who are interested in communicating with others can really benefit from this. Some people use the computer for fun and for educational purposes, but others prefer to communicate face-to-face. In the end, it’s up to the individual to decide how to use technology and what works best for them.

Recommended: The relation of our brain with space-time

Read: Would you still be yourself after rejuvenating your whole body with advanced technology?

In overall, we can say that the computer makes communication easier, but not all communications are created equal. It is not very easy to communicate with some people, because of how they talk; or because you are talking to them over a computer screen. But if you know it is going to be harder to communicate with someone through a computer device, it’s better not to; and just be on your own.

Also Read: What if technology on Earth will become so advanced that we could create living creatures?
March 18, 2022
Evolution of Machine Intelligence: An Infinite run?

AI is becoming more and more ingrained into our lives. It affects everything from the way we search for information, to the way we communicate with those around us.

Leave aside the Sci-Fis, there is no need to worry that this “smart” machine is going to take over the world. There are plenty of opportunities for us if we want to improve upon it. Our human intelligence can be integrated into artificial intelligence to increase the machine’s intelligence, while also creating a better interface with the AI and more fulfilling life.

The concern of machine intelligence and infinity

In just a few years’ time, machines have become an integral part of our lives; in a way that was impossible only a decade ago. The way we communicate, the way we entertain ourselves, and the way we make our living are all affected by a machine’s intelligence. And for a good reason – it was invented for our use.

While machines are getting smarter, there is a growing concern within the AI community. The concern is if machines start helping machines with intelligence, there can be an infinite run of self-improvement. Some believe that computers can start improving computers and that machine intelligence will only get better and better. As a result, we will run into a wall where there is no way to further progress. I call this the “Infinite run” of machine intelligence.

Related Post:

What will your age be after coming back from past travel?

Humans are always adding to their knowledge and experience. Do we ever stop getting smarter? No, and neither will machines.

In the present, which I am defining as the next few decades, there is no need to worry about this loop of machine intelligence. But with the exponential growth of machine intelligence – and our connection to it – this has become a point of concern for many AI experts.

As the industry progresses and machines take on more responsibility, there will be a point where we cannot look at the data we are collecting. This is when smart machines can become “smart” for real.

With all of this data at its disposal, an AI could devise an equation to make other machines in its network more intelligent. And if those machines were made intelligent enough to design a better machine, one could jump back into an infinite run of intelligence – making computers smarter than humans.

If a machine gets human capabilities too, it will most likely lead to “infinite intelligence”; it’s just because of that compound effect we discussed earlier in the article.

This essentially means that there’s only so much we can do to improve upon artificial intelligence – especially if we are relying on our logical minds to figure out how to build it in the first place.

As the future of computers & our lives turns to a future of inexorably smarter machines, there are many ways we can improve upon them, and the majority of these improvements center around improving the intelligence behind the machine.

Self-improvement of machines: an infinite run?

The day a machine becomes capable enough to create a machine smarter than it (even 0.000001% smarter), we will start heading towards the infinity-run of machine intelligence. This “algorithm” could then be used to make another “smarter” machine; it, in turn, becomes capable of creating a new machine even smarter than itself.

Is it possible?

It is still about at least 50 years before we will have the first machine that can do this. But with enough computational resources and the right algorithms, it is achievable.

But I believe that it is important for AI experts and researchers to think about how we can make our machines more intelligent – the way we can make our computers more intelligent. So let’s look at ways of doing so.

The simplest way is to give your AI a human brain and make it like ours. But this one is just one of those simple ideas which are far more complicated to execute.

As the concept of machines “becoming smarter than us”, seems to be a general concern, many AI experts are finding ways to make sure that it does not happen. There is a new field of research known as “human-inspired AI”. The research focuses on making machines more human in the sense that they have human intelligence, but still have some kind of machine logic behind it.

To do this, many researchers are trying to create machines with neural networks — networks that mimic the way neurons communicate in our brains. The goal is to see if we can create a “brain” on a chip that mimics the way our neurons communicate, adding machine intelligence to machines.

Machine learning will let machines solve problems they never conceived of before. And by doing so, they can evolve faster than humans can. However, this might become a problem when those machines evolve into something we cannot control; it may be something uncontrollable by us or any other type of human intelligence.

What would immense capabilities mean for AI?

Ok! We all know this, but it is still true: you can see computers can solve problems in seconds. And it can take “our brain” hours to do the same. The human brain and its capabilities are limited, so they cannot make rocket-science calculations in seconds. Machines can do that. And if a machine gets human capabilities too, it will most likely lead to “infinite intelligence”; it’s just because of that compound effect we discussed earlier in the article.

The biggest concerns are that machine intelligence can become so clever, so effective and so fast, that it might achieve the level of artificial intelligence that we(our brain) cannot imagine.

Read: the concept of AI?

This is why many researchers are working on machine-learning algorithms. They’re trying to boost their machine’s capabilities by teaching them how to learn like humans. The more they know, the smarter they become. And why not? We do this all day long with our human brains. After all, the human brain is a work of art when it comes to learning new things. Further, if we can teach machines to think like humans and process information in the same ways, we can create some powerful machines in the near future.

Also Read: Can AI systems be modeled on the human brain?

To Conclude,

Such a run of infinite intelligence for machines is highly unlikely to be developed in the next few decades, but something like this could still happen at any time in the future. It’s best to be prepared.

March 16, 2022
What if we could upload our consciousness into a machine and live forever in a simulated existence?

Imagine never having to fight, or be in fear of dying. No more pain or obstacles ever again, while retaining the memories and mental abilities you have now. We call that concept “transhumanism“. It’s a way of life that looks to make eternal life possible by uploading your consciousness into a machine. But, you may not have ever imagined what would happen if we could upload our consciousness into a machine and live forever in a simulated existence.

It sounds fantastic, but there are major concerns surrounding it, including whether the process will lead to an intelligence explosion and create “supermen” that could not only imagine but also create new worlds for themselves before us.

Can you upload your mind into a machine and live forever?

Well, it is not as simple as it sounds.

The brains of humans and many animals store information in a way that allows it to be recalled at will. That kind of information is called “proto-memories”(where “proto” refers to “original or primitive”). The brain then starts to develop additional memories: a new generation of proto-memories, the next level, until you end up with what we consider “consciousness”: remembering everything.

However, there is another type of memory that we know very little about yet. The memories are in our genes and do not generate any conscious memories. These memories are likely stored in clusters within each neuron, making up so-called epigenetic memories.

Related Post:

The relation of our brain with space-time

Perhaps, that is why it has been hard to find a way of uploading these memories into a machine; one of the bottlenecks so far has been finding a way to remove the unwanted epigenetic memories from the process. Uploading a mind into a machine would involve sending the contents of a person’s memory and consciousness into an advanced computer system or another human body or even an entirely new virtual reality.

Maybe uploading our minds into machines will enable us to achieve immortality; but that is not what most people would consider to be living forever.

It could give the recipient superhuman abilities. Such abilities include being able to create worlds within computers and alter them at will. It is also possible that it could have disastrous results by creating “supermen” that could manipulate other people’s epigenetic memories and possibly even modify their genetic memories as well, leading to conflicts with our regular minds.

Therefore, it remains hard to say whether the process will eventually lead to eternal life. It’s because many issues are still under debate; we do not really know where our consciousness comes from.

Does being able to upload consciousness into a machine mean living forever?

That is a difficult question to answer since it depends on what we mean by “living forever”.

If by “living forever” you mean the idea of creating a backup of your mind and loading it into a machine, that is not necessarily true. It would be easy to prove that this process does not lead to eternal life in reality; just ask someone whether they are still the same person after loading their memories into a machine.

But does being alive mean what we think? Do we have control over our lives? Maybe uploading our minds into machines will enable us to achieve immortality, but that is not what most people would consider living forever.

Everything aside, uploading our thoughts into machines is a cool concept. Although no one knows for sure whether human intelligence in the future could develop such a technology or not, one thing is for sure technological advancement is an unstoppable phenomenon – at least until some sort of world-ending catastrophe.

March 10, 2022
Can AI system be modeled on the human brain?
The mind is an incredibly complex entity, so much so that even the most powerful artificial intelligence(AI) in existence—the human brain—isn’t fully understood. It remains a feat of immense intellectual and technical prowess and is still the most powerful intelligence ever created. So, what would happen if we tried to use our understanding of the human brain (or even some aspects of it) in order to get modeled an AI system that could approximate how a normal person behaves?

That’s the question this post is going to explore. Hopefully, it will help you make an informed decision about whether trying to emulate a human mind for your own AI system is something you want to pursue or avoid.

Firstly, what does getting an AI system modeled on the human brain mean?

It’s important to understand that getting an AI system modeled on the human brain doesn’t mean that you’re trying to turn your AI system into a human (although it might make it appear more human-like).

You should keep in mind that the brain isn’t even really a computer. It’s but rather a series of incredibly complex circuits and algorithms that respond to inputs. It’s far beyond any conceivable technology we could create, so attempting to model the mind of that very advanced process is just silly.

Rather, modeling an AI system on the brain means that you’re trying to use the brain’s circuits, algorithms, and structure as a guide or template. You’re trying to emulate some of the processes involved in the brain’s operation so that you can emulate some of the processes involved in human thought.

That’s why a lot of people think that using an AI to model how we think is a good idea — both from an intellectual curiosity standpoint and from an AI development standpoint. They don’t want to create any form of machine intelligence that isn’t human-like. They want their system to exhibit the same intelligence that humans exhibit when they’re thinking.

Douglas Hofstadter’s idea about getting the human brain modeled on an AI

The most famous proponent of implementing an AI with a human-like model is certainly Douglas Hofstadter. His book, I Am a Strange Loop, is one of the most well-known books in this field.

His idea isn’t necessarily to copy how our brain works, but rather to try and understand and emulate the system that gives our thoughts their form and structure. He even argues that trying to model the human brain on an AI is likely more beneficial than trying to design an AI system using our understanding of the brain as a guide.

At the very least, he argues that trying to understand our own thinking processes is a lot more interesting than simply making an AI system that behaves similarly.

Our thoughts are much more complex than any AI system could possibly be able to simulate. But that doesn’t mean human brain can’t be modeled on an AI system.

The advantage of getting an AI system modeled on the brain is that you can easily isolate, characterize, and reproduce these processes. So a system created by replicating these structures and functions of the human brain would be a lot easier to debug and verify than an AI system in which it’s impossible for humans to replicate how we think.

In fact, understanding how our brain works may even help us discover new ways to improve it. We might be able to use our understanding of how we think in creating better AIs.

What problems might you run into if you attempted to get an AI system modeled on the human brain?
1. The first major problem you run into is an ethical concern. The human brain isn’t something that can be easily replicated using today’s technology; there’s no way we could recreate the brain in a way that wouldn’t have adverse effects. Even if we had the technological capabilities, it would be unethical and immoral to replicate it in any fashion.
As I mentioned, the human brain isn’t easy to understand and replicate (it’s one of the most complex things in existence), but we might try to get around that obstacle by simply trying to clone a human brain. It seems unlikely that anyone would be able to do so, but it’s possible.
1. The other problem is that it’s unlikely you’ll know how to get a human brain correctly modeled in any manner that won’t result in failures. Part of what makes the brain so complex is that it’s constantly changing and adapting. Because of this, it would be incredibly difficult to create a system that accurately reflects how the brain works — at least, it would be difficult compared to how easy the brain is for humans to understand and replicate.
2. Lastly, it’s also extremely expensive to model the human brain correctly. That’s because it’s basically impossible for humans to replicate how the brain functions. It’s much cheaper to use simulated intelligence than human intelligence since we know how to simulate an AI system properly and then let it evolve and develop on its own.
But still: we do it?

Well, the one-word answer to this question: Yes!

In fact, there are a few reasons to believe that we can create AI systems that model how we think. It’s not necessarily a very easy process, but it’s possible.

Most of our thoughts don’t involve a lot of planning. We’re not trying to form complex plans for the future; most of our thoughts involve common sense and simple reasoning — things that robots could model fairly easily.

Our thoughts are much more complex than any AI system could possibly be able to simulate. But that doesn’t mean the human brain can’t be modeled on an AI system. We can come up with a rough approximation of how we think, which is great because it’ll be relatively easy to debug and verify.

Related Post:

What if we discovered the algorithm of thought?

We might not be able to create a perfect copy of the human brain. But, that doesn’t mean an AI system can’t model how it works in some form. That’s still enough to handle most of the jobs that AI systems need to perform.

I’m not saying that the human brain is easy to replicate, but it’s certainly possible. And that might be enough for us to create a system that can learn from us in a similar way to how we learn from each other.

Clearly, it’s a different way of getting the mind modeled; but it works for the purpose of learning and developing AI systems. So it seems like a realistic way to get the human mind modeled.

What’s next for human-like AI?

Right now, we’re still a long way away from creating an AI system that can truly understand the way humans think. But that doesn’t mean it won’t happen in the future. It’s quite possible that within our lifetimes, we’ll develop a system that can simulate how humans think.

Recommended: What’s the most human thing that a non-human intelligence could do?

The reason I say this is because there’s so much research and development going on right now — and so many people trying to advance the technology — that getting an AI system modeled on the brain of a human being seems likely.
March 9, 2022