[JumpCrisscross]

> it’s not smart to claim it’s one way or the other without further evidence

It's perfectly smart to claim Hoffman did not make "contact with external entities on a trip (eyeball with wings)" with zero evidence because the status quo is not having conversations with eyeballs with wings. Herego, the burden of proof is on the eyballs-with-wings guy.

[mistermann]

Anyone who makes a claim has a burden of proof.

If I'm on The Truman Show, could someone please spill the beans?

[deepvibrations]

Yet we still work on the assumption that consciousness arises within space-time...

Disappointing the burden of proof is not deemed necessary in this case!

[mistermann]

> Yet we still work on the assumption that consciousness arises within space-time...

What role is the "yet" playing here, to indicate contradiction to my comment?

And without it, I'm not sure what the point of the comment would be.

This whole comment section is so confusing.

[r2_pilot]

For what it's worth, I don't have evidence that you are conscious (and I never can; your qualia of the concept of the color red and your other internal world-state representations are solely yours, assuming you are not a P-zombie). For the record, I also do not make magic claims of free will nor assume there are laws outside known physics. If you wish to call in dark matter as a potential agent of causal change, then you can propose your theories backed by evidence and we'll continue as the evidence leads. But as far as my own existence, well, cogito ergo sum and all