<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>…</b>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Tara Maya via extropy-chat<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] ChatGPT says it's not conscious<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…I stand by my "camouflage" analogy. Camouflage is not lying. "Lying" implies a conscious mind. (Hence the Seinfeld paradox that one part of our brain fools another part, enabling us to "lie" it isn't a lie, but--I would insert--a mental gymnastics that has evolutionary benefits so has been able to evolve.) … Tara Maya<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Interesting insight, thx Tara.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>We laugh at Costanza because he really identifies what you wrote about, but it is funny because he is making the case that one part of the brain decides what it wants to believe, then intentionally fools another part of the brain to believe it. But the part of the brain doing the fooling “knows” what it is doing, keeping the paradox in place.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>We have so many terms for this, such as wishful thinking and intentional blindness and religious faith, hell even love I suppose. We intentionally embrace the good and overlook the bad in our sweethearts, do we not? I do. My bride certainly does, sheesh. I suck. But she loves me anyway, ignoring that fact.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>We can talk ourselves into believing ourselves, and it still works, even if we know we arrived at the dubious conclusion by dubious means. We know that just because we know we are fooling ourselves, we are fooled just the same.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Sheesh what a weird place to live, inside a blob of carbon inside a shell of calcium. It’s really nuts in here. Crazy fun, but crazy just the same.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>spike<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>