this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2025
179 points (75.9% liked)

Technology

76581 readers
2496 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

And here I was waiting to get unplugged, or maybe finding a Nokia phone that received a call.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No it is proof that it is true because a system that does not have the data to create an experience cannot create the experience.

You claimed that dreams were unconstrained by sensory input..... A limitation caused by the lack of sensory input is a natural constraint.

am 100% saying the body is a computer with sensory attachments I have no idea where you go the things about peripheral and central nervous system from.

Cognitive science? The brain and peripheral nervous system develop and act together. You cannot have one without the other, and if you damage one you damage the other. There is no natural or logical delineation from sensory input organs and the brain. A lot of the processing, especially from reactive functions don't even require the brain, and are handled by just the spinal cord.

The idea that the body is a computer with sensory attachments is outdated. Our metal and physical development is a reaction of us engaging with our environment on a physical level.

reality is something we aren't capable of understanding because it exists outside of our set of sensory input unless we can use tools to collapse information to within our range of sensory input.

I would say that reality consisist of what we can engage with in either a physical or metaphysical way. If it's simply something that we can't either mentally or physically interact with, then it is definitionally unimportant.

Tibetan buddhists are suggesting which is the non dual reality of experiencing things through the lens of perception.

While I accept a dualistic version of reality, I propose that perception alone is not what determines reality. I think embodied cognition gives us a much more accurate depiction of reality we engage with.

For example, without a body what is a bicycle? Through just pure observation alone, it is nothing but a chunk of odly shaped metal and plastic. It is our physical interaction with the bicycle that gives it its true meaning.

Reality is not just what we observe, it is what we interact with on a physical level.

[–] confuser@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Good luck trying to understood this

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Great rebuttal....really proves you know what you're trying to talk about!

[–] confuser@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Lol that is a funny autocorrect, but yeah, I'm done here

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Something tells me you're not nuanced in the use of sarcasm......

[–] confuser@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

I think I am allowed to respond to sarcasm without acknowledging it, it doesn't have to mean I don't understand it.