Comment on Recent conversations between Dawkins and sentient chat-bot Claudia (Claude)
blargh513@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks agoBuddhism would tell you that there is no “self” to speak of. Without a self how can there be consciousness?
The edges of our reality have never been anything we can perceive. However, it seems that they’re far away enough such that we can do fun things like have buttsex and smoke drugs, so I’m ok with it.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
The Buddhist perspective is neat, and certainly a profoundly different way of thinking that I think is valuable. But I do think it’s hard to ignore that there is a conscious experience; there is something that it means to “be you”: it’s what you’re experiencing right now, and at all times, for all your life (except sometimes while asleep). This can be tested by taking drugs that remove this distinction and cause ego death (this is not a recommendation).
In sumary: I appreciate the sentiment behind the whole one-with-the-universe thing, but ultimately I find it only figuratively true rather than literally. I can only truly experience who I am, not what anything else is. There is value to be found in attempting to anyways, but it is an unreachable goal to strive for, not something attainable.