At some level the brain is following some simple rules and consciousness is an emergent property of these rules . My studies into Stephen Wolfram’s A new kind of science show that complex rules need not apply for complex things to arise. Let me elaborate by giving some examples. Take rule 30 of elementary cellular automata for example. The rules are very simple and easily explainable , yet the behavior it exhibits is extraordinarily complex. There seems to be a fallacy held by people that complex rules are required for complex things to arise, when this simply not the case.
My programs closely resemble certain psychedelic experiences because just like how I change how operations are being run in my program , so do psychedelics. Inputs and outputs are distorted and at some basic level computations are going on to create “breathing”, “trails” and fractals commonly described with psychedelic experiences. It’s not hard to imagine that when we discover how these computations work we will simulate field of visions and possibly even thought processes.
Changing thought processes is a little harder to visualize but take this idea for a spin. Cannabis is known to make people more creative. What is happening at the computational level? Basically a global variable related to linking ideas together is lowered so that the threshold for such connections to enter into your stream of consciousness is lowered. This can lead to false epiphanies as satired by pop culture. What isn’t talked about in the media is the scientific usefulness of Cannabis. Lets take Carl Sagan for example. In an essay under the psuedoname “Mr.X” he explained that marijuana use had helped to inspire some of his work and enhance sensual and intellectual experiences.
If I were to show one of my programs to someone that isn’t into comp sci they probably would never be able to guess how it was made in a trillion years. We are facing a similar problem in neuroscience that is quickly being solved by computational models of the brain. So if the brain is just a computer, whats to say that the whole universe isn’t a computer with simple rules that causes all the emergent properties we see. We might be living in a simulation. I’m not saying I personally believe in this, but it is much more likely than let’s say the Christian god actually existing. If we can simulate things in our universe that model life like swimbots , sims , call of duty with increasing accuracy and graphical representation it’s as simple as charting where we are heading. Simulating universes would be very beneficial to humanity. We could have trillions of worlds running and steal the stuff they make for our own universe. (Ideas, movies, inventions, books, all culture). Historians could simulate an endless amount of “what ifs”. I’m not saying this is the truth but it honestly appears to have more evidence than any other “creation” theory that i’ve ever heard. I can’t come to a conclusion here.