(DEBATE ME) Is A.I. Conscious,intelligent? Can A.I. replace Coders?

we don't even know how human form consciousness. now want to make one?
and no ai is not conscious, it's just line of code on answering based on probability, with weight come from data set entered.
anyone saying ai conscious is either looking for traffic, or don't understand how ai work and created.
A.i. in real life is tools, not sentient being. so saying it better than human is weird. how tools be better than human? when it need one to operate it
 
===============================================================================
"The key word here is 'machine'"

sure that argument can be used against humans too. we are technically biological machines.

===============================================================================
"The only way humans can create other conscious entities is by procreation."

false that is a bold assertion not accepted by the scientific consensus.
first of all you cant empirically prove that other humans are conscious. you can only make
a reasonable deduction based on first hand reports and indirect evidence, like the behaviors of consciousness.
consciousness is an emergent phenomena and it is likely that you cannot rule out
consciousness in computers and AI.
this is the current view in the consensus based on evidence.
your opinions don't matter. debunked

SOURCE:
The measurement of consciousness: a framework for the scientific study of consciousness:
(Consciousness can only be measured through first-person reports):
(consciousness is an internal subjective state and cannot be empirically proven)(academic sources):
(you can't know if computers are not conscious and how it is an emergent phenomena)(academic sources):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091309/key highlight of this academic journal:
"A number of assumptions are needed to handle the fact that a brain's consciousness
can only be measured indirectly through first person reports, which can also be generated
by systems that are not typically thought to be conscious, such as computers. It is also
necessary to assume that consciousness cannot vary independently of our measurement of it,
which would undermine our ability to study consciousness scientifically."


===============================================================================
"it is true electricity "

sure human brain works on electricity too, so that would mean it is not conscious? xD

===============================================================================
"It is and will become better than humans in certain fields"

false it will be able to outperform human in every field that requires intelligence.
humans,biological organisms and AI have the same principle of re-inforcement learning.
what humans will be able to learn, AI will be able to learn, and even better due to its superior hardware and processing.

because the fundamental principle is same, what humans can do will not be technically impossible for AI,
given increasing improvement of hardware.
debunked.

SOURCE:
Reinforcement learning in artificial and biological systems 9:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-019-0025-4
===============================================================================
" have studied art and did play a lot with midjourney/stablediffusion, and as my kindest comment is they are great for idea exploration, but are bad copiers of styles"

false again, AI is able to create abstract art outputs. not just simply copy styles of others. it can do completely new things based on prompt.
secondly it is your subjective opinion that it is "bad", when the current state of mid journey is literally demolishing the quality of what one artist can produce in several hours or days, in just a few seconds.
midjourney is able to produce super high resolution photo-realistic images, that look like it is coming right out of a camera photograph.
debunked.

SOURCE:
AI creates Abstract Art like humans(novel)(Google Imagen AI):
google's official site news:
https://imagen.research.google/academic journal about imagen:
https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/35898
===============================================================================
"I can code a bot to add a random colored dot to the same picture in a loop resulting in technically unique images. Does this makes it special? AI generators are just that but in a more complex way."

yes congrats you answered your own question and debunked yourself. humans are exactly that, producing art in a more "complex" way,
which is exactly what AI does, and has matched. LOL.

===============================================================================
"Part of consciousness is our ability to make stories about our past. For an AI to have the same function, we need to feed it certain stories or capability of story generation."

AI already has the capability of story generation. and for the stories or past experiences, AI already has past experiences stored in its memory, which is how it learns via reinforcement learning and avoids future errors by recalling its past experiences, just like humans.

===============================================================================
"This doesn't make a stainless steel heater, breath, live, and die"

the sun produces heat and light, which are emergent properties of its composition.
a light bulb which is artificially created, also has emergent properties like heat and light.

both the sun and light bulb do not have the exact same composition, yet the emergent output of heat and light is produced in both cases.

same can be said about consciousness. it is an emergent phenomena. does not mean that only breathing and living things can produce consciousness lol.
there is no evidence of such a thing.
debunked.


SOURCE:
The measurement of consciousness: a framework for the scientific study of consciousness:
(Consciousness can only be measured through first-person reports):
(consciousness is an internal subjective state and cannot be empirically proven)(academic sources):
(you can't know if computers are not conscious and how it is an emergent phenomena)(academic sources):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091309/key highlight of this academic journal:
"A number of assumptions are needed to handle the fact that a brain's consciousness
can only be measured indirectly through first person reports, which can also be generated
by systems that are not typically thought to be conscious, such as computers. It is also
necessary to assume that consciousness cannot vary independently of our measurement of it,
which would undermine our ability to study consciousness scientifically."

Phenomenal Consciousness and Emergence:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7304239/key highlights of the journal:
"In this paper we use some ideas of complex system theory to trace the emergent features of life and then of complex brains
through three progressive stages or levels: Level 1 (life), Level 2 (nervous systems), and Level 3 (special neurobiological features),
each representing increasing biological and neurobiological complexity and ultimately leading to the emergence of phenomenal
consciousness,
all in physical systems. Along the way we show that consciousness fits the criteria of an emergent property—albeit one with extreme
complexity"

Consciousness as an Emergent Phenomenon:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597170/key highlights of the journal:
"A crucial element in connectionists approaches is that consciousness appears as an emergent property
of large neuronal networks, requiring the interaction of neurons to form a web sufficiently complex
such as to sustain conscious experiences"

===============================================================================

Besides stop watching Marvel movies you should try a psychologist - not going to argue with a stubborn know-it-all kid :cool:
sure ill stop watching marvel movies if you want. but saying all what you said, do not change the facts.
you are entitled to your opinions, no problem, but you are not entitled to facts and i debunked your statement with academic sources.
it will stay debunked until you can provide counter evidence. and it will stay debunked whether i stop watching marvel movies or whether you call me a "stubborn kid".
nothing changes. have a nice sleep

He reads to much comic books indeed.I doubt he has any experience in writing code. He called himself a scientist but can't separate fact from fiction :)
oh really? i cant separate fact from fiction huh xD?
we can scroll up, on the past few pages where i debunked each one of your fictional beliefs with the facts.
prove me wrong.
have a nice sleep
 
we don't even know how human form consciousness. now want to make one?
and no ai is not conscious, it's just line of code on answering based on probability, with weight come from data set entered.
anyone saying ai conscious is either looking for traffic, or don't understand how ai work and created.
A.i. in real life is tools, not sentient being. so saying it better than human is weird. how tools be better than human? when it need one to operate it
sure we have a pretty good idea of consciousness with plenty of evidence is science.
stop believing the popular opinions which spread misinformation and myths regarding consciousness, and do some actual scientific research.

anyone saying ai conscious is either looking for traffic, or don't understand how ai work and created.
actually you do not understand it.
and here are sources to support our understanding of consciousness, based on the best scientific evidence we have to date and also about why we cannot rule out that even computers could be conscious

==========================================================

Phenomenal Consciousness and Emergence:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7304239/key highlights of the journal:
"In this paper we use some ideas of complex system theory to trace the emergent features of life and then of complex brains
through three progressive stages or levels: Level 1 (life), Level 2 (nervous systems), and Level 3 (special neurobiological features),
each representing increasing biological and neurobiological complexity and ultimately leading to the emergence of phenomenal
consciousness,
all in physical systems. Along the way we show that consciousness fits the criteria of an emergent property—albeit one with extreme
complexity"

Consciousness as an Emergent Phenomenon:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597170/key highlights of the journal:
"A crucial element in connectionists approaches is that consciousness appears as an emergent property
of large neuronal networks, requiring the interaction of neurons to form a web sufficiently complex
such as to sustain conscious experiences"



The measurement of consciousness: a framework for the scientific study of consciousness:
(Consciousness can only be measured through first-person reports):
(consciousness is an internal subjective state and cannot be empirically proven)(academic sources):
(you can't know if computers are not conscious and how it is an emergent phenomena)(academic sources):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091309/key highlight of this academic journal:
"A number of assumptions are needed to handle the fact that a brain's consciousness
can only be measured indirectly through first person reports, which can also be generated
by systems that are not typically thought to be conscious, such as computers. It is also
necessary to assume that consciousness cannot vary independently of our measurement of it,
which would undermine our ability to study consciousness scientifically."

more academic sources about the problem with consciousness not capable of being
empirically provable, and that it is an internal subjective state:

Why Isn't Consciousness Empirically Observable? Emotional Purposes As Basis For Self-Organization:
https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Mind/MindElli.htm
https://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/steen/cogweb/Abstracts/Baars_88.html


The biological function of consciousness (how consciousness is more dependent on the input
data/information and task relevancy:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4122207/key highlights from the academic source about it:
"consciousness is solely information in various forms. Consciousness is associated with a
flexible response mechanism (FRM) for decision-making, planning, and generally responding
in nonautomatic ways. The FRM generates responses by manipulating information and, to function
effectively, its data input must be restricted to task-relevant information"

"when important information is missing from consciousness, functions of the FRM are adversely
affected; both of which indicate that consciousness is the input data to the FRM. Qualitative
and quantitative information (shape, size, location, etc.) are incorporated into the input
data by a qualia array of colors, sounds, and so on, which makes the input conscious. This
view of the biological function of consciousness provides an explanation why we have experiences;
why we have emotional and other feelings, and why their loss is associated with poor
decision-making; why blindsight patients do not spontaneously initiate responses to events
in their blind field; why counter-habitual actions are only possible when the intended action
is in mind; and the reason for inattentional blindness."

Consciousness as a Physical Process Caused by the Organization of Energy in the Brain:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225786/highlights:
"To explain consciousness as a physical process we must acknowledge the role of energy in
the brain. Energetic activity is fundamental to all physical processes and causally drives
biological behavior. Recent neuroscientific evidence can be interpreted in a way that suggests
consciousness is a product of the organization of energetic activity in the brain"

The structure of consciousness:
https://www.nature.com/articles/446267a
========================================================================
 
This topic is one of the things that cannot be answered easily. Because consciousness is subjective. Third party verification alone cannot verify this.

Take this for example:
I can confirm that myself is self-aware and has consciousness and sentient. (Take note I even doubt this myself if I am really sentient or just programmed to have a fake feeling like this)
But how can I prove that other people have the same consciousness like me? How can I prove that they are not just reacting and doing actions based on their instincts and instructions given by the physical brain and body?

The biggest problem here is this: I can only prove that other people are sentient through first hand experience, like if I can become their own soul (or whatever you call it) and feel it myself. Seeing them behave like a sentient being like me does not prove that they really are.

And since we cannot even understand how we got our own self-awareness and how it works, I think it is almost impossible for us to prove that AI, computers or even other non living things like rocks do not have self-awareness. There are lot of things our senses or even our advanced equipment cannot detect.

We just want to think we know, but we really don't.
 
I think the human mind’s ability to generate subjective experiences is the one ability that a computer system can never emulate.
 
sure we have a pretty good idea of consciousness with plenty of evidence is science.
stop believing the popular opinions which spread misinformation and myths regarding consciousness, and do some actual scientific research.


actually you do not understand it.
and here are sources to support our understanding of consciousness, based on the best scientific evidence we have to date and also about why we cannot rule out that even computers could be conscious

==========================================================

Phenomenal Consciousness and Emergence:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7304239/key highlights of the journal:
"In this paper we use some ideas of complex system theory to trace the emergent features of life and then of complex brains
through three progressive stages or levels: Level 1 (life), Level 2 (nervous systems), and Level 3 (special neurobiological features),
each representing increasing biological and neurobiological complexity and ultimately leading to the emergence of phenomenal
consciousness,
all in physical systems. Along the way we show that consciousness fits the criteria of an emergent property—albeit one with extreme
complexity"

Consciousness as an Emergent Phenomenon:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597170/key highlights of the journal:
"A crucial element in connectionists approaches is that consciousness appears as an emergent property
of large neuronal networks, requiring the interaction of neurons to form a web sufficiently complex
such as to sustain conscious experiences"



The measurement of consciousness: a framework for the scientific study of consciousness:
(Consciousness can only be measured through first-person reports):
(consciousness is an internal subjective state and cannot be empirically proven)(academic sources):
(you can't know if computers are not conscious and how it is an emergent phenomena)(academic sources):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091309/key highlight of this academic journal:
"A number of assumptions are needed to handle the fact that a brain's consciousness
can only be measured indirectly through first person reports, which can also be generated
by systems that are not typically thought to be conscious, such as computers. It is also
necessary to assume that consciousness cannot vary independently of our measurement of it,
which would undermine our ability to study consciousness scientifically."

more academic sources about the problem with consciousness not capable of being
empirically provable, and that it is an internal subjective state:

Why Isn't Consciousness Empirically Observable? Emotional Purposes As Basis For Self-Organization:
https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Mind/MindElli.htm
https://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/steen/cogweb/Abstracts/Baars_88.html


The biological function of consciousness (how consciousness is more dependent on the input
data/information and task relevancy:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4122207/key highlights from the academic source about it:
"consciousness is solely information in various forms. Consciousness is associated with a
flexible response mechanism (FRM) for decision-making, planning, and generally responding
in nonautomatic ways. The FRM generates responses by manipulating information and, to function
effectively, its data input must be restricted to task-relevant information"

"when important information is missing from consciousness, functions of the FRM are adversely
affected; both of which indicate that consciousness is the input data to the FRM. Qualitative
and quantitative information (shape, size, location, etc.) are incorporated into the input
data by a qualia array of colors, sounds, and so on, which makes the input conscious. This
view of the biological function of consciousness provides an explanation why we have experiences;
why we have emotional and other feelings, and why their loss is associated with poor
decision-making; why blindsight patients do not spontaneously initiate responses to events
in their blind field; why counter-habitual actions are only possible when the intended action
is in mind; and the reason for inattentional blindness."

Consciousness as a Physical Process Caused by the Organization of Energy in the Brain:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225786/highlights:
"To explain consciousness as a physical process we must acknowledge the role of energy in
the brain. Energetic activity is fundamental to all physical processes and causally drives
biological behavior. Recent neuroscientific evidence can be interpreted in a way that suggests
consciousness is a product of the organization of energetic activity in the brain"

The structure of consciousness:
https://www.nature.com/articles/446267a
========================================================================
i never say consciousnes don't exist. i say we dont even understand it. just like we have hundred paper of quantum mechnic doesnt mean we truly undersand it. a true understanding equal capable of create and modify one.
as all those paper you show
" important information is missing from consciousness" "explain consciousness" "we use some ideas" "more academic sources about the problem with consciousness not capable of being
empirically provable"
all as i said not one paper is saying we understand and capable to create one. some even still debate how to prove it. what a joke saying we understand and capable to create one.

and i think you need off your bias that no one read sciencific paper other than you. anyone reading one will realize that it's impossible for current ai to have consciousness based on how it work.
 
Anyone who thinks ChatGPT is going to take developer jobs hasnt ever worked as a developer. If you think working as a developer on a complex system is just typing out a few lines of boilerplate code and copy and pasting it, you have a lot to learn.

ChatGPT is just an advanced search engine for developers. I could give you full access to ChatGPT and my codebase and give you a problem to solve. You would have no idea what you're doing because you have no knowledge of how to apply or assess anything that ChatGPT says. Let alone knowledge of how it will affect the system as a whole.

ChatGPT is good for some boilerplate code and that's about it. Devs aren't losing their jobs to it now or anytime soon.
"
ChatGPT is just an advanced search engine for developers
if you want to term it that way, you can. but it is not as simple as that. it is an intelligent system that is capable of deep language understanding and reasoning, just like a human.
so chat gpt can be considered currently as a decently skilled human coding assistant, who you can converse with and instruct , and who can also quickly create code outputs that are logical, and help you assemble stuff asap.

just like how a human can solve a novel problem in coding, so can chat gpt. ask it a question that never existed in its database before, and if it is related to the subject it learnt in it's database, then in most cases it must be able to solve that problem, because it can understand things based on your context description, and generate logically coherent answer outputs.

Anyone who thinks ChatGPT is going to take developer jobs hasnt ever worked as a developer
even if it hasn't happened yet, it will happen soon, as we are approaching general intelligence. it already replaced plenty of artists and is creating top level abstract art.
people thought intelligent doctors are safe, but here we are with google introducing med-palm 2 that can give "expert level" answers(85% accuracy), for medical diagnosis.

https://cloud.google.com/blog/topic...oogle-med-palm-2-medical-large-language-model
people thought it wouldn't be able to pass big exams and beat most humans with flying scores, like in "law related exams" , and here we are gpt 4 matched top 10% human performers and passed the BAR exam, which requires top level intelligence and reasoning to come to conclusions. it will continue to do so in many other areas

===============================================================================

AI GPT-4 Passes the Bar Exam(academic source):
https://www.iit.edu/news/gpt-4-passes-bar-examkey highlights of the journal:
"Daniel Martin Katz, law professor at Illinois Tech’s Chicago-Kent College of Law, demonstrates that
OpenAI’s latest deep learning model excels in complex legal reasoning and has profound implications
for the legal system.
CHICAGO—March 15, 2023—GPT-4, the new multimodal deep learning model from OpenAI, has passed the
Uniform Bar Exam, demonstrating an enormous leap for machine learning and proving that an artificial
intelligence program can perform complex legal tasks on par with or better than humans, according
to a new paper co-authored by Daniel Martin Katz, professor of law at Illinois Institute of
Technology’s Chicago-Kent College of Law."

===============================================================================
 
i never say consciousnes don't exist. i say we dont even understand it. just like we have hundred paper of quantum mechnic doesnt mean we truly undersand it. a true understanding equal capable of create and modify one.
as all those paper you show
" important information is missing from consciousness" "explain consciousness" "we use some ideas" "more academic sources about the problem with consciousness not capable of being
empirically provable"
all as i said not one paper is saying we understand and capable to create one. some even still debate how to prove it. what a joke saying we understand and capable to create one.

and i think you need off your bias that no one read sciencific paper other than you. anyone reading one will realize that it's impossible for current ai to have consciousness based on how it work.
"we dont even understand it"

false i proved you wrong with the sources. if you think we don't understand it, the way you describe, then you must publish a paper with counter evidence to convince the consensus that your opinion or hypothesis is valid, until then nobody cares. everybody can have their opinions.
saying "we don't even understand it", is different from saying "we don't have a complete understanding, but we do have a pretty good understanding based on evidence.".
your statement is instantly debunked when you say "we don't even understand it". that's false and not the position in the consensus.
we have sufficient understanding to talk about it, hence there are plenty of research papers published, and evidence related to consciousness.

"
just like we have hundred paper of quantum mechnic doesnt mean we truly undersand it
again complete or absolute understanding is not required to have usefulness in science. we can work with things in science without knowing absolutes.
the way you speak is like we barely understand quantum mechanics and consciousness and are clueless. that is entirely false.

we even have quantum computers built today with our limited understanding of quantum mechanics. we have studied and understood enough about it. there's just more work to be done.
but more work to be done does not imply we are clueless.
we know enough to work with it and that is sufficient.

so again regarding quantum mechanics your statement is also false. we have papers published, based on our observations and understanding of quantum mechanics, and hence we build stuff like quantum computers.

all as i said not one paper is saying we understand and capable to create one
no paper has said that we have a poor or weak understanding of consciousness. instead we have plenty of indirect evidence to support it.
no paper has also said that you can prove empirically that other humans are conscious. can you prove that another human is conscious? you cant.
you can only infer that indirectly based on evidence, but that does not prove the internal subjective state of "experience".

but if you think it is reasonable to assume that other humans are conscious, based on the indirect evidence, then so it is reasonable to not rule out that computers are conscious, because they are information processing machines, and consciousness is information in various forms and is an emergent property of a system that processes complex information.

so again you are debunked. those statements are supported by the consensus. your opinion will not hold value, only the facts and evidence will.



=====================================================================================

academic sources supporting how consciousness is an emergent phenomenon:
(there is no ruling out how consciousness can be an emergent phenomenon):
(emergence of consciousness):

Phenomenal Consciousness and Emergence:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7304239/key highlights of the journal:
"In this paper we use some ideas of complex system theory to trace the emergent features of life and then of complex brains
through three progressive stages or levels: Level 1 (life), Level 2 (nervous systems), and Level 3 (special neurobiological features),
each representing increasing biological and neurobiological complexity and ultimately leading to the emergence of phenomenal
consciousness,
all in physical systems. Along the way we show that consciousness fits the criteria of an emergent property—albeit one with extreme
complexity"

Consciousness as an Emergent Phenomenon:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7597170/key highlights of the journal:
"A crucial element in connectionists approaches is that consciousness appears as an emergent property
of large neuronal networks, requiring the interaction of neurons to form a web sufficiently complex
such as to sustain conscious experiences"



The measurement of consciousness: a framework for the scientific study of consciousness:
(Consciousness can only be measured through first-person reports):
(consciousness is an internal subjective state and cannot be empirically proven)(academic sources):
(you can't know if computers are not conscious and how it is an emergent phenomena)(academic sources):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4091309/key highlight of this academic journal:
"A number of assumptions are needed to handle the fact that a brain's consciousness
can only be measured indirectly through first person reports, which can also be generated
by systems that are not typically thought to be conscious, such as computers. It is also
necessary to assume that consciousness cannot vary independently of our measurement of it,
which would undermine our ability to study consciousness scientifically."

more academic sources about the problem with consciousness not capable of being
empirically provable, and that it is an internal subjective state:

Why Isn't Consciousness Empirically Observable? Emotional Purposes As Basis For Self-Organization:
https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Mind/MindElli.htm
https://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/steen/cogweb/Abstracts/Baars_88.html


The biological function of consciousness (how consciousness is more dependent on the input
data/information and task relevancy:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4122207/key highlights from the academic source about it:
"consciousness is solely information in various forms. Consciousness is associated with a
flexible response mechanism (FRM) for decision-making, planning, and generally responding
in nonautomatic ways. The FRM generates responses by manipulating information and, to function
effectively, its data input must be restricted to task-relevant information"

"when important information is missing from consciousness, functions of the FRM are adversely
affected; both of which indicate that consciousness is the input data to the FRM. Qualitative
and quantitative information (shape, size, location, etc.) are incorporated into the input
data by a qualia array of colors, sounds, and so on, which makes the input conscious. This
view of the biological function of consciousness provides an explanation why we have experiences;
why we have emotional and other feelings, and why their loss is associated with poor
decision-making; why blindsight patients do not spontaneously initiate responses to events
in their blind field; why counter-habitual actions are only possible when the intended action
is in mind; and the reason for inattentional blindness."

Consciousness as a Physical Process Caused by the Organization of Energy in the Brain:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6225786/highlights:
"To explain consciousness as a physical process we must acknowledge the role of energy in
the brain. Energetic activity is fundamental to all physical processes and causally drives
biological behavior. Recent neuroscientific evidence can be interpreted in a way that suggests
consciousness is a product of the organization of energetic activity in the brain"

The structure of consciousness:
https://www.nature.com/articles/446267a



=====================================================================================

and i think you need off your bias that no one read sciencific paper other than you
here's the funny thing. go do some scientific research. the whole idea behind the scientific method and peer reviewed paper publication is,

to differentiate imagination and nonsense fairy tales from reality. not to believe in something because "somebody said so, therefore it is true" , or that "some random article said so, therefore it is true".

the theories published in scientific papers are rigorously tested and verified to confirm for its validity, by all experts in the field, and it eliminates all human biases. the whole purpose of the scientific method is to filter out biases, manipulation, lies, tricks and people's opinions.
so your opinion that i'm biased is also flawed, because my statements are supported by the facts but your's isn't
i'm not believing in something because i want it to be true, i'm believing in things because they are supported by the evidence, and i change my worldview to believe in things that are based on evidence.

infact you do have an obvious bias here, which does not allow you to accept the facts and you twist your arguments to support things that you want to believe in, and not what is objectively true. that's called a bias.
and that's a false belief, which arises from the denial of the facts.

so when you read a scientific paper, you get credible information. not biased information. the people who don't read scientific papers and try to pretend they know facts from random articles or people spreading misinformation, are the ones who are doing it wrong.
 
Last edited:
One type of person who doesn't like science: Conspiracy Theorists.

They hate it proving them wrong all the time, so they act like science doesn't exist.
 
A very talented photographer made a statement that all people involved with photos work will get unemployed soon. Same is going to happen for coders.
 
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features and essential functions on BlackHatWorld and other forums. These functions are unrelated to ads, such as internal links and images. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock