Very unsatisfactory discussion. Just a weird soup of all the current theoretical philosophical and neuroscientific models… with no ‘inevitable’ about any of it.
If I’m missing something important here, let me know.
If I’m missing something important here, let me know.
I braced myself ready to be moved....
It contains no definition of consciousness, no substantial mathematics and no compelling argument for the possibility of consciousness (let alone its inevitability - which the PDF paper repeatedly emphasises in bold).
It is also difficult to read because it is tediously footnoted such that the actual prose occupies a minority of each page.
I think they just wanted to use the word inevitable a lot. Is that a "high impact" term in academia these days?