Your response it needlessly insulting. The person you are talking about has taken a complex topic and expressed their model for consciousness in a short, clinical way. Then you insult them as not being a real human for describing their model clinically.
A more charitable response might be: I don't understand how your model addresses the origin of consciousness. Could you elaborate on that?
Personally, I understood their point and didn't question whether a human wrote it.
Your response it needlessly insulting. The person you are talking about has taken a complex topic and expressed their model for consciousness in a short, clinical way. Then you insult them as not being a real human for describing their model clinically.
A more charitable response might be: I don't understand how your model addresses the origin of consciousness. Could you elaborate on that?
Personally, I understood their point and didn't question whether a human wrote it.
Ah, you are probably right. I'm just deeply baffled by their answer.
What is consciousness, if not perceiving-feeling-acting-learning loop?
I would define consciousness as having internal experience, i.e., qualia.