Yet the emergence of this sense-of-self is vacuous in his argument.

Futurist. Certainty. Eh. They’re back propagating future certainty to us.

In short, “In the future we will build [x] that will be self-aware and believe it’s conscious but won’t be. I know this is true because we are self-aware but not conscious either but believe we are.”

It’s a stretch. It sounds plausible but we have to accept a LOT of ideas about ourselves in order to make his argument work.

Is it POSSIBLE that we are constructed consciousnesses? Sure.

For example, we hold several views of self simultaneously.

There’s the me looking out experiencing.
There’s the me I envision other’s seeing.
There’s the dialogue that’s happening in the phonological loop.
There’s the various roles dialoging within the phonological loop.

Now is it funhouse mirrors bouncing back and forth in a physical way?

In some sense perhaps.

Yet the emergence of this sense-of-self is vacuous in his argument.

He’s saying, “We’ll advance so far that it’ll happen. Because it will happen that way, it stretches back in time to describe us as we are.”

It’s resting on nothing, ultimately.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


9 − = five

Leave a Reply