• Fawkes@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Lol no. Actually cells are demonstrably NOT sentient. They have no capacity for choice. No capacity for emotion or experience. They are literally molecular machinery. And we(scientists) understand that machinery to a shocking degree.

    If you think cells have any degree of sentience, then you must make a similar argument for advanced clockwork machines. Not robots, pure wind-up clockwork automata.

    • BJW@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Ah, so you’ve experienced each of their existences? Fascinating.

        • BJW@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I can’t, since I’ve never been a wristwatch. Maybe they’re not, or maybe they are through a mechanism for which science has no current explanation. We can’t know, only surmise.

          • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Okay, then you’re not actually engaging in any degree of coherence. Your ignorance is not wisdom, despite what you seem to have convinced yourself.

            • BJW@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              That’s some impressive hubris you’ve got.

              So tell me, in your infinite wisdom, from where does sentience arise and what is the smallest organism that is sentient?

              • Fawkes@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                22 hours ago

                No, I don’t think I will. Because I don’t believe there is any answer I can give you that won’t be merry with more insults and arrogance. I made the claim that sentience cannot exist in a purely mechanistic system, like a wrist watch. Because there is nothing there unexplained, unknown, or more nuanced than gears and springs.

                The burden of proof lies on you to explain how a wristwatch could have any degree of sentience. And insulting me does nothing but show the emptiness of your claim, and the fragility of your pseudo-wisdom.

                Denying ALL knowledge by taking a bong rip and saying “But how can we ever really know?” It’s not wisdom or humility. It’s pretending ignorance is wisdom.

                • BJW@lemmus.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  You seem to have this backwards. YOU’RE the one making a claim, so the burden of proof is on you. I’m saying it’s impossible to know, you are saying you know without a doubt. Prove it.