So you can't present one evidence for phenomenal consciousness. You can only present evidence for human consciousness behaviour, but a P-zombie could do that too.
The mind begs the question
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: The mind begs the question
No, it doesn't denote something not relative. The objective world is relative. Ideals would just be someone's personal idea of what they prefer or expect for whatever reason. I don't prefer or expect something non-relative or "absolute." The world external to us (as well as internal to us) is relative.Atla wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 1:31 pmObjectivity / the absolute perspective is an ideal, that does denote something not relative. It's an ideal, not a literal perspective.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 7:15 amThe whole point being that there is no "absolute perspective"--the whole idea of that is incoherent/nonsense. "Objectivity" doesn't denote something not relative. It doesn't denote something "absolute."Atla wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 12:16 amIt doesn't presuppose that, it's the absolute perspective vs the relative perspective. Science strives for objectivity, even if it's unattainable.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 21st, 2021, 4:50 pm
"Actual" versus "perceived" in that sense presupposes a preferred spatiotemporal situatedness. But there is no such thing.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
Saying that the world is relative, is also a statement from the objective/absolute perspective. We have this ideal of objectivity that we try to approach, we try to construct a picture that's as objective as we can make it.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 2:41 pmNo, it doesn't denote something not relative. The objective world is relative. Ideals would just be someone's personal idea of what they prefer or expect for whatever reason. I don't prefer or expect something non-relative or "absolute." The world external to us (as well as internal to us) is relative.Atla wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 1:31 pmObjectivity / the absolute perspective is an ideal, that does denote something not relative. It's an ideal, not a literal perspective.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 7:15 amThe whole point being that there is no "absolute perspective"--the whole idea of that is incoherent/nonsense. "Objectivity" doesn't denote something not relative. It doesn't denote something "absolute."
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: The mind begs the question
No, it isn't. It's from my perspective, obviously. It wouldn't be something you'd say, right? Not that any statement could even BE objective in the first place. Statements need semantic content, and semantic phenomena only occur mentally.
- Faustus5
- Posts: 306
- Joined: May 8th, 2020, 10:08 am
Re: The mind begs the question
A subject's report, whether verbal or otherwise, is a measurement of something.
Brain scans are one way of measuring internal events. You aren't even remotely making an effort, are you?
No faith is involved. We can listen to subjects reporting that they are experiencing specific kinds of conscious events, while seeing what is happening inside of their bodies during their reports. Then we see if there are reliable consistencies where the same kinds of brain events lead to the same kinds of reports from subjects--and they do. That's how science has made such strides in explaining conscious experiences.
But all you're interested in doing is slapping your hands over your eyes and ears and effectively shouting "LA LA LA LA" because you aren't interested in learning anything. Pathetic, really.
- Consul
- Posts: 6036
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: The mind begs the question
What I've been arguing for is the dependence of P-consciousness on animal brains; and there is sufficient scientific evidence for that. (Humans are animals too.)
- Consul
- Posts: 6036
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: The mind begs the question
QUOTE>Faustus5 wrote: ↑March 15th, 2021, 5:49 pmSOME people. Remember, there is no agreement that the hard problem even exists or is coherent. It is still being debated and no one side has "won", to the degree any side "wins" in philosophy at all. I'm in the camp that thinks the hard problem is an artifact of really confused philosophy of mind that ought to be rejected.
"The hard-problem view has a pinch of defeatism in it. I suspect that for some people it also has a pinch of religiosity. It is a keep-your-scientific-hands-off-my-mystery perspective. One conceptual difficulty with the hard-problem view is that it argues against any explanation of consciousness without knowing what explanations might arise. It is difficult to make a cogent argument against the unknown. Perhaps an
explanation exists such that, once we see what it is, once we understand it, we will find that it makes sense and accounts for consciousness."
(Graziano, Michael S. Consciousness and the Social Brain. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. p. 7)
<QUOTE
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
You don't seem to understand that objectivity is a shared ideal, an unattainable goal.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:04 pmNo, it isn't. It's from my perspective, obviously. It wouldn't be something you'd say, right? Not that any statement could even BE objective in the first place. Statements need semantic content, and semantic phenomena only occur mentally.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
Brain scans don't measure the internal "conscious" events themselves, but measure external correlates of such assumed events. And from such scans we can for example try to reconstruct what someone may be dreaming about. It's like you hear about neuroimaging for the first time.Faustus5 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:45 pmA subject's report, whether verbal or otherwise, is a measurement of something.
Brain scans are one way of measuring internal events. You aren't even remotely making an effort, are you?
No faith is involved. We can listen to subjects reporting that they are experiencing specific kinds of conscious events, while seeing what is happening inside of their bodies during their reports. Then we see if there are reliable consistencies where the same kinds of brain events lead to the same kinds of reports from subjects--and they do. That's how science has made such strides in explaining conscious experiences.
But all you're interested in doing is slapping your hands over your eyes and ears and effectively shouting "LA LA LA LA" because you aren't interested in learning anything. Pathetic, really.
Subject's reports are also third-person reports of such assumed events, not the direct transmission of such events.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
Yes you've been repeating this blatant lie for years, shows your character. There isn't a single shred of scientific evidence that has found P-consciousness, when comparing organism brains with lifeless stuff. All that was found is that brains behave like brains.Consul wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 10:18 amWhat I've been arguing for is the dependence of P-consciousness on animal brains; and there is sufficient scientific evidence for that. (Humans are animals too.)
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
Neat, but the Hard problem was solved ages ago, and of course in hindsight the explanation makes infinitely more sense.Consul wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 10:32 amQUOTE>Faustus5 wrote: ↑March 15th, 2021, 5:49 pmSOME people. Remember, there is no agreement that the hard problem even exists or is coherent. It is still being debated and no one side has "won", to the degree any side "wins" in philosophy at all. I'm in the camp that thinks the hard problem is an artifact of really confused philosophy of mind that ought to be rejected.
"The hard-problem view has a pinch of defeatism in it. I suspect that for some people it also has a pinch of religiosity. It is a keep-your-scientific-hands-off-my-mystery perspective. One conceptual difficulty with the hard-problem view is that it argues against any explanation of consciousness without knowing what explanations might arise. It is difficult to make a cogent argument against the unknown. Perhaps an
explanation exists such that, once we see what it is, once we understand it, we will find that it makes sense and accounts for consciousness."
(Graziano, Michael S. Consciousness and the Social Brain. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. p. 7)
<QUOTE
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: The mind begs the question
What would you say that comment has to do with what I wrote (and that you quoted)?Atla wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 12:23 pmYou don't seem to understand that objectivity is a shared ideal, an unattainable goal.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:04 pmNo, it isn't. It's from my perspective, obviously. It wouldn't be something you'd say, right? Not that any statement could even BE objective in the first place. Statements need semantic content, and semantic phenomena only occur mentally.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
I said for about the third time that this "objective perspective" of science, that you keep bashing, was never meant to be taken literally.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:14 pmWhat would you say that comment has to do with what I wrote (and that you quoted)?Atla wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 12:23 pmYou don't seem to understand that objectivity is a shared ideal, an unattainable goal.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:04 pmNo, it isn't. It's from my perspective, obviously. It wouldn't be something you'd say, right? Not that any statement could even BE objective in the first place. Statements need semantic content, and semantic phenomena only occur mentally.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: The mind begs the question
Okay, but how would that indicate, per what I said and what you quoted, that I "don't seem to understand that objectivity is a 'shared ideal'"? I didn't say anything that had anything to do with that.Atla wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:19 pmI said for about the third time that this "objective perspective" of science, that you keep bashing, was never meant to be taken literally.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:14 pmWhat would you say that comment has to do with what I wrote (and that you quoted)?Atla wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 12:23 pmYou don't seem to understand that objectivity is a shared ideal, an unattainable goal.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:04 pm
No, it isn't. It's from my perspective, obviously. It wouldn't be something you'd say, right? Not that any statement could even BE objective in the first place. Statements need semantic content, and semantic phenomena only occur mentally.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: The mind begs the question
Whatever, then you changed the topic for like the third or fourth time in a few comments.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 24th, 2021, 4:22 pmOkay, but how would that indicate, per what I said and what you quoted, that I "don't seem to understand that objectivity is a 'shared ideal'"? I didn't say anything that had anything to do with that.Atla wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:19 pmI said for about the third time that this "objective perspective" of science, that you keep bashing, was never meant to be taken literally.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:14 pmWhat would you say that comment has to do with what I wrote (and that you quoted)?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023