[Arjuna144]

These days we have some theory about this. See Stuart Hameroff MD, a Professor of Anesthesiology and Psychology, and Director of the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona.

To sum it up from my limited understanding: This disturbs the quantum coherance in the microtubelies in all cells (But mostly nurons) which is needed for consciousness to "limit" itself to a identity.

[k8sagic]

Consiousness is a emerging feature of our brains complexity.

The way this dude throws around quantum and co is just esotherical.

[Arjuna144]

I am not aware of any proof that "Consiousness is a emerging feature of our brains complexity". For all that I know throwing around such statements of truth is mere stupidity and anti scientific

[k8sagic]

Funny that you go the 'anti scientific' route while proposing a person who also doesn't have proof of his ideas/theory

"While the emergence of consciousness from brain dynamics is commonly accepted" https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Phenomenal-consciousness...

"Consciousness as an Emergent Phenomenon: A Tale of Different Levels of Description" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597170/

[meindnoch]

Ummmm what?

[Dachande663]

Hameroff is one of those common pseudo-psy frauds. Dawkins hit the nail on the head when he said consciousness is hard to grasp and understand so everytime something in science comes along that is also hard to grasp, people latch on to it as an explanation. 70s it was chaos theory, then everyone switch to quantum entanglement, and already seeing it leak into AGI.

[n4r9]

I recall coming across him before due to his extensive collaboration with Penrose. Typifies the thin line between genius and bonkers.

[Arjuna144]

No no, Dawkins is just a old scientist and even though I admire him, he is just repeating the same old lines. These days there is research and qunatum effects in the structures of microtubelins was shown by other research groups also:

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936

It is best to really do the research and not rely on people who already have made up their mind (that Dawkins guy for example seems like he really wants Materialism to be true).

[robbiep]

You’re already polling way over what you’ve just said, though.

There is no doubt that small structures exhibit quantum effects. There is absolutely no demonstrable relationship between small things exhibiting quantum effects and consciousness.

You give your whole game away when you say

’which is needed for consciousness to "limit" itself to an identity.’

This is actually mysticism. You’re already making absolutely extreme claims for what you believe consciousness to be.

It may well be that consciousness is ‘in the microtubules’. But today we have no evidence of this. Nor do we have effective understandings of why anaesthetic drugs work (as opposed to, say, our mechanistic understanding of how opioids cause analgesia, or other pharmapsychophysiological relationships).

Keep an open mind, but don’t let your brain fall out

[Arjuna144]

You are right, what I claimed is byond the current scope of science. It is a bit like saying 'A brain can "see" an apple even when the eyes are closed" (alluding to what we call "imagination"). You _know_ it can, but science can not prove it. It is based on your very own experience

[Rastonbury]

I didn't know who he was but the fact the commentor had to list his MD title and position gave it away

[snaeker58]

Yeah this type of madness is rampant when it comes to AGI believers, always makes me want to drive a nail in my hand.

[Arjuna144]

There are so many talks, I just picked a shorter one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ484WZS-lo