The authors are professionals. You hold that your knowledge base is is greater 
than the authors?  EM surely could be the root of how humans get conscious, and 
that could easily be the quantum field effect, no, not quantum computing, but 
QFT. Like carbon/water QFET's. 
Do quantum effects play a role in consciousness? – Physics World
We still both for animals and machines need a working analysis. The How 
You're not curious about how animals and machinery (if you are correct?) 
attained consciousness? 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Clark <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Fri, Mar 17, 2023 1:34 pm
Subject: Re: 4 Tests Reveal Bing (GPT 4) ≈ 114 IQ (last test is nuts)

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 6:37 PM <> wrote:

> I took me under 10 min to locate a worthy article submitted for JC's 
> criticisms. 

I'll bet it took you less than 10 seconds, you popped two or three buzzwords 
into Google  and then you picked the first one that came up and sent it to the 
list without reading a word of it. You didn't miss much, it didn't increase my 
understanding of consciousness one bit, but you claim the article's insights 
brought us "much closer to understanding human consciousness" , well that part 
must've been written in invisible ink because I sure didn't see it. 

> Here tis [drum roll]
> What Neuroscientists Think, and Don't Think, About Consciousness - PubMed 
> (

 Unlike you I did  read the article, or at least I read the abstract, and based 
on that I flat out refuse  to waste my time by reading the entire worthless 
thing, it is after all the purpose of abstracts.

> The approach the majority of neuroscientists take to the question of how 
> consciousness is generated, it is probably fair to say, is to ignore it

Yes it is fair to say that a majority of neuroscientists ignore consciousness 
and they do so because it's the rational thing to do, it would be silly to 
divert finite mental resources from fantastically productive intelligence 
research, especially now when so many dramatic discoveries are being made in 
that area,  to a moribund field like consciousness research that has not 
advanced one nanometer in the last thousand years and will not do any better in 
the next thousand.  

> Neuroscience has furnished evidence that neurons are fundamental to 
> consciousness;

And how did neuroscientists figure that out? By observing that when neurons 
behave in a certain way organisms behave in a certain way and they guess, I 
repeat they guess, that when organisms behave in that certain way then their 
consciousness must be  in a certain state. I personally think that is a good 
guess, it's the same guess we make when we  determine that  our fellow human 
beings are not conscious when they are sleeping or under anesthesia or dead.
And then the author starts babbling about  

> staggeringly complex system of electromagnetic field"

A keen grasp of the obvious. Everything except neutrinos and Dark matter 
Interacts with the electromagnetic field.  

> The EM field literally manifests the computations, or signaling, or 
> information processing/activities performed 

Both computers and neurons produce electromagnetic fields. So what? What does 
that have to do with consciousness? The author never says, he just maintains 
that somehow electromagnetic fields produce consciousness and of course he 
provides no evidence to support his belief.   
John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
To view this discussion on the web visit

Reply via email to