Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Pattern

  • Rank
    New Member


  • MBTI
  1. Here is how I understand it . If we just take the fundamental laws of physics (all the current laws in the accurate and perfected form) as well as mathematics and the staring conditions at a given point and produce a perfect model of the universe, we will see the emergence of all the usual phenomena: from physics to chemistry to biology to intelligence, each step follows inevitably from the previous. The theory will tell us exactrly how and why it happens. Consciousness doesn’t seem to follow from anywhere (given the laws of physics and mathematics) so it will probably not be present in this model. The fact that consciousness exists leads to the conclusion that the original starting set of laws was incomplete and extra laws are required to account for the emergence of conscious experience out of information processing in our world. ...... added to this post 52 minutes later: I'm familiar with various interpretations of this experiment. In the end of his book Chalmers tries to connect interpretations of quantum mechanics with his theory, saying that it is particularly compatible with Everett interpretation. If the experiment has different possible outcomes each outcome correspondes to a history with a separate observer (which is in itself formed by a particular discrete configuration of particles/elements) and that is why we see the world not as a blurry mess of probabilities presented by wavefunction but as one dicrete history.
  2. I’ve recently read a book about the philosophy of consciousness called Conscious mind – in search of fundamental theory by David Chalmers. The main idea of the book is that of dualism between the physical world and consciousness (no mysticism here!). Even though the conscious experience seems to be caused by the physical structures processing information in a particular way it doesn’t seem to affect the physical world at all. This is a one of the key ideas of the book and quite a non-intuitive one. All systems should be explicable in terms of function and structure (right… right ?). So when a brain of a human or an animal gets some input, computation is performed and the output takes forms of a reaction. Now it is entirely redundant to ask what it feels like subjectively to be that system. We do not (usually) wonder what our computers experience. Such explanation has no place in our understanding of computers. Moreover, an external observer (say, an alien) would not presume that humans have subjective experience. And them saying that they do doesn’t matter for saying is just that- yet another reaction to an external stimulus. The only reason for us to believe in the existence of subjective experiences is that we experience them. This is in fact the only kind of knowledge directly accessible to us. It would however not be illogical to presume the existence of creatures without consciousness but exhibiting the same behavior as normal humans. No amount of knowledge of the structure and functionality of their brain could tell, whether they in fact experience subjectivity (say, color red). In philosophy of mind such creatures are called ‘philosophical zombies’. Similarly, no amount of scientific information could convey to a person what it is like to see color red if they have never experienced any. The author therefore concludes that there must be separate laws that govern the behavior of consciousness. Those laws are sort of like fundamental laws of physics but they only manifest themselves in the area of consciousness (otherwise we would have already discovered them) so they are separate and give rise to a separate phenomenology, hence the dualism. When/If such laws are discovered, we may well find out that many various systems, biological, non-biological and even groups of people have their own emergent conscious experiences. It is unsettling that the logic behind such deliberations and conclusions seems quite sound, at least they are not easy to disprove as long as the arguments are taken seriously and considered carefully. Can you find any inconsistencies in these arguments?
  3. The importaint question is not only whether at least one path to radical life extension works (there are quite a few of them, both biological and non-biological), but how long it will take to its introduction into medical practice. It would be such a bummer to die just years before the tipping point.
  4. Sure. Learning and training are hardly effective after a certain threshold. Human biology is essentially limiting. However, I'd be extremely cautious about the side effects and risks. Besides, stem cell therapy is going to be an essential part of curing age related neural degeneration. Hopefully the technology will be applied in clinical practice soon. It will change the world.
  5. Is it in principle possible to get uncensored internet access with a two way sattelite coonectin? is it legal in China to use ones own sattelite dish for this purposes using foreign providers?
  6. I can't think of anything more important than longevity/antiaging research. A person to discover a "cure" for ageing will make the highest possible impact on humanity. And he will drastically change the world as a result. By the way, Da Vinchi studied anatomy among other fields.
  7. Well, I don't think a typical INTJ could endure hours of such an interview without their "social mask" falling off.
  8. I find breadth of knowledge more important even though specialization is generally considered more practical. Can't imagine focusing on one singe field even for a few years.
  9. I really hope the aging problem will be solved within my lifetime. I want to witness the human history unfold and reach its culmination. And even after that I'd find something new to explore so I'd never get bored. Moreover,having all this time would give one immense freedom.