[epitomix]

"Maybe this is really just a fundamental challenge to our assumptions about motion of particles or information transfer in the universe."

Check out this TED talk on just that subject. http://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as...

Here's the punch line, space, time and matter are components of a user interface produced through evolution. We don't take the desktop and icons of our computer UI literally and we shouldn't take our evolved UI literally either.

[Zigurd]

He dialed back the radicalism of his position for his TED Talk. He concludes that consciousness must be something other than computation in the brain, something he just teases in the TED Talk. He spends most of the talk on the less radical Interface Theory of Perception.

If I understand him correctly, he says we don't perceive brains as they really are and therefore brains are not a physical basis of consciousness. Whoa.

[paxcoder]

Fun to think about, but his argument is a non sequitur.

[epitomix]

Maybe, but my wording is not his argument. Here is a blog version of the same idea. https://edge.org/response-detail/25450

[mjklin]

Is thought part of this UI as well?

[TuringTest]

It's more like the model in a Model-View-Controller UI.

The philosophical question would be "what is the controller?"

[politician]

There's a great quote in the comments.

> Perhaps humanity is the only species burdened with distinguishing the truth.

[westoncb]

Cool. I'll check it out!