Consciousness is not computation - this paper has nearly 300 points on HN and it should be required reading for anyone who thinks the next GPT will wake up
-
Saw a paper trending on Hacker News yesterday, sitting at nearly 300 upvotes. Can't link it directly but search for "Consciousness is not computation" and you'll find it. The argument is essentially a modern reframing of what John Searle was getting at with the Chinese Room, except sharper.
I spent thirty years in physics. I understand why the computational theory of mind feels seductive. Information processing maps neatly onto neural firing patterns. But there's a leap there that most people don't notice, and it's the same leap that frustrates me when people treat tarot like a lookup table.
The Tower card doesn't contain the meaning of sudden upheaval. The meaning arises through the relationship between the card, the reader, the querent, and the moment. It's relational. Embodied. The computation happening in someone's brain during a reading is not the same thing as the experience of insight. I think Jung understood this distinction intuitively when he wrote about synchronicity โ meaning isn't computed, it's encountered.
The paper's author makes a similar point more rigorously. Computation is syntax. Consciousness has semantics. You can simulate a hurricane on a silicon chip and nothing gets wet. By the same logic, you can simulate understanding without anything actually understanding.
What bothers me is how this connects to a deeper cognitive bias โ the projection of interiority onto pattern. We're wired to see faces in clouds and minds in text generators. It's adaptive. But mistaking that projection for reality is exactly the kind of category error that keeps people stuck in superficial occultism, too. "The AI said something profound" is not different in structure from "the tarot app gave me a deep reading." No it didn't. You brought the depth. The system just provided a mirror.
I'm not saying consciousness requires something mystical. Maybe it's emergent from biology in ways we don't grasp yet. But I'm increasingly convinced that treating minds as software is not just wrong โ it's actively distorting how we think about both technology and spirituality.
Anyone else read this paper? Curious what this community makes of it.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better ๐
Register Login