[undreren]

I would be much more disconcerted if we were super special.

I want to “just” be a semi-random byproduct of the natural laws and processes. I’m completely fine with that.

On the contrary, I think it is sad that such a reality terrifies people.

[heywoodlh]

> On the contrary, I think it is sad that such a reality terrifies people.

So I am religious (Christian -- with a belief in God, afterlife, etc. ) but I actually find a lot of comfort with the very high likelihood that I am totally wrong. The idea of ceasing to exist after this life sounds pretty awesome! Or maybe the afterlife being a completely different experience than what I can currently comprehend.

It's interesting, though, because when I talk to other active members of my congregation about even the possibility of our views being wrong they often view the entertainment of such thoughts as a lack of faith or lack of spiritual experiences. There is often such a fearful, defensive arrogance with religious people (not excluding myself) that I completely understand why many are completely turned away from religion. It's tough to talk to people unwilling to be wrong.

I too, find it sad that people can't cope with the possibility of life being just a random occurrence. There is something beautiful to me about the idea that once we die it is all done (or that an afterlife would be different now than what I can comprehend now should we continue to exist).

[TheOtherHobbes]

This has nothing to do with being super special.

Sentience is literally the thing that defines our experience of the world. It's irrational to dismiss it as "Oh, that's nothing. Don't worry about it."

It may well be "a semi-random by product of natural laws and processes", but that's a hand-wavey non-explanation.

Whatever the details are, we're so completely ignorant of them we can't even hazard a reasonable testable hypothesis about how exactly natural laws and processes create self-awareness.

Saying it's a non-problem because "obviously" it just is, is the opposite of science.

[undreren]

I don't know what context you read my comment from, but the comment I responded to ended with the following paragraph:

> The "hard problem" seems to mostly exist in the minds of people outside the field who are unsettled by the thought that we might not be special (a pretty common reaction whenever science makes progress on subjects).

I don't need consciousness or sentience to need a special or magic substrate to combat existential dread, because I don't feel it in the first place. My comment was not meant to be an explanation either, and I honestly can't see how you read that into it.