Wait, I think I know what the question is, now. Yes, this thing seems to suggest that human thinking is well-approximated as deterministic—a hypothesis which matches what I’ve heard elsewhere. Off the top of my head:
I once read a story about a guy being offered lunch several times in a row and accepting again and again and again in similar terms until his stomach felt “tightish”.
There was a family friend taking sleeping medication which was known to cause sleepwalking, and she had an entire phone conversation with her friend in her sleep—and then called the same friend after waking up planning to discuss the same things.
Of course, the typical quantum-mechanical stories of consciousness are far too vague to be falsified by this or any other evidence.
Edit: As Nick Tarleton cogently points out, this is an exaggeration—it is certainly falsifiable in the way phlogiston or elan vital is falsifiable, by the production of a complete correct theory, and it is further so by e.g. uploading.
Of course, the typical quantum-mechanical stories of consciousness are far too vague to be falsified by this or any other evidence.
They could be falsified by successful classical uploading or an ironclad argument for the impossibility of coherence in the brain (among other things); furthermore, I think most of their proponents who are actual scientists would accept such a falsification.
Wait, I think I know what the question is, now. Yes, this thing seems to suggest that human thinking is well-approximated as deterministic—a hypothesis which matches what I’ve heard elsewhere. Off the top of my head:
I once read a story about a guy being offered lunch several times in a row and accepting again and again and again in similar terms until his stomach felt “tightish”.
There was a family friend taking sleeping medication which was known to cause sleepwalking, and she had an entire phone conversation with her friend in her sleep—and then called the same friend after waking up planning to discuss the same things.
Of course, the typical quantum-mechanical stories of consciousness are far too vague to be falsified by this or any other evidence.
Edit: As Nick Tarleton cogently points out, this is an exaggeration—it is certainly falsifiable in the way phlogiston or elan vital is falsifiable, by the production of a complete correct theory, and it is further so by e.g. uploading.
They could be falsified by successful classical uploading or an ironclad argument for the impossibility of coherence in the brain (among other things); furthermore, I think most of their proponents who are actual scientists would accept such a falsification.
You’re right, of course—editing in a note.