A question about the nature of thinking

According to the definition in the political book, it is an objective reality that is independent of consciousness and can be reflected by consciousness.

Consciousness and thinking are described by them as the form and function of matter, just like a camera can take pictures, so the statement of "taking pictures" is not valid. But the relationship between operating system and computer is more similar, and it is also the focus of fierce debate on the relationship between consciousness and matter.

Does the software exist? Can artificial intelligence be generated? This is a big problem.

However, in D's political examination, it was forcibly put forward that artificial intelligence could not be realized, saying that consciousness is the consciousness of human brain, the result of long-term evolution of natural history and the product of labor. What a joke! Can't computers evolve naturally? Is the computer broken? I think many computers are working day and night, so tired that they are scrapped.

Even if artificial intelligence can be produced, it is not 100% certain that consciousness is the product or function of matter.

Why?

What is a soul? According to some early philosophical viewpoints, the soul is a kind of entity and the source of thinking and consciousness, that is to say, there is an independent reality, called the soul, which can produce spirit and consciousness. Even if the body dies, the soul exists in the universe. At first glance, it may be a bit hard to accept, because there is no such common sense, but if it is understood as an unknown existence that has not been observed, it will be natural. It can be seen that artificial intelligence may also make the "soul" parasitic. But the difficult problem is that people have not really got the fact of communicating with the so-called soul.

But it is also certain that, from the common sense, people's decisions do not reflect the law of being locked in, and people show considerable free will!

Many modern philosophies have avoided this argument and directly said that the source of consciousness is will, which is Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, and the source of consciousness is existence, which is existentialism. Whether it is the will to power, the will to survive or existentialism, it has not directly solved the fundamental problem: is the source of consciousness the same as matter? If it is not the same thing, can it exist independently?

But one thing is certain, even if the source of consciousness and matter are the same thing, it must be bound by its own independent law and exist in another form.