That you don't understand that your question is flawed, is not helpful. It's not a counter question. It's a question that aims to try and sort out your flawed question. Your premise through your comments, is that religion is a way to ignore reality as it is, to add something that is 'a remnant of the magical Phase of childhood' that requires people to abandon logic and scientific thinking, despite the reality that many scientists down through history that were religious. So, what evidence do you have that you are experiencing nature/ reality, as it is?

Your question is flawed. Using the term 'another reality' unjustifiably presumes that there is more than one. However, since it seems that you think you have access to reality as it really is, what evidence can you provide that you do?

It's quite obvious that you are one of those right hemisphere deficients who thinks the left hemisphere's re-presentation of reality, is reality 'as it is'.

At the end of the day, lack of religious belief indicates a deficiency in the right hemisphere. Not all have lost this. However left hemisphere dominance sees itself as the arbiter of reality as it is, mistaking its re-presentation of reality, as reality itself.

That would come as quite the surprise to the many religious scientists down through history.

Lol

This is my favourite part of X at the moment. #SaitamaVsGoku

Ah, I see you are an idiot. It's quite obvious to anybody reading, that at least in this specific instance, I know better that you. I'd be open to you proving me wrong, but based on your interactions so far, I don't think you're capable of much more than

Of course she did not use those words, and I'm sure she (and folks such as yourself) don't realize what they've said.

*you're

So, when I level the accusation at Sabine @skdh, that she has made Ai her god, rather than deny, she justifies. Now I'm wondering what percentage of the population feels the same as Sabine. Bloody hell.

Actually an interesting idea. It may be that evolution did not select for truth detecting, and instead, selected for survival. It goes to Sabine's premise, which is that understanding of nature, of reality as it is, is simply beyond the human animal.

Sure she is. She is advocating faith in Ai just like theists advocate faith in God.

Perhaps, however that is not it's intent. Those who try to read science into religion do both a disservice. The point is that the great subject of religion, God, is essentially ineffable to us and requires faith. In the same way you advocate faith in AI, nature being at some point, ineffable to human minds.

People say the same of religion. You have simply made AI your god.

Orpheus Leading Eurydice from the Underworld - Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot (Camille Corot), 1861.

Let's not forget that it was with music that Orpheus once moved stones. Iain McGilchrist

No. I'm not mixing anything up, rather it is you who have lost the point of the OP. OP claims we have empirical evidence of consciousness. You responded to my comment 'false'. I did not say that consciousness is an illusion. You did, missing the point. Which is this: If we had empirical evidence for consciousness, it would be demonstrable. It is not. Prove to me that you are experiencing consciousness. Scratch that. You can't. No one can. Appeal to ignorance is a bad way to go, and subjective report, is not empirical evidence for consciousness. Nor is behaviour.

Bryan Adams and Colin James

Weird tangent apropos on nothing. Anyways, argument from ignorance/ argument from personal incredulity? You're gonna have a bad time.