• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does Matter Really Exist?

Mercutio said:
We know both the signal and the receiver for our sensory data. We know neither signal nor receiver for your alleged "additional". This would be vexing, except that no one has ever demonstrated a phenomenon there for us to try to explain via your alleged "additional".

You can propose all you want. When you have data, get back to us.
Click to expand...
Well, obviously that part of us which is separate from and, aware of the sensory data is not one and the same. This is the part that we acknowledge as being "conscious" ... albeit there seems to be no means of differentiating between it and our "experience" of the sensory data. In other words the two seemed to be derived from the same or, a similar source ... an "input signal" in other words.
 
Iacchus said:
No, I am perfectly capable of observing that the sky is blue. Aren't you?
Click to expand...
I know this sounds silly to you, but I don't regard your ability to perceive color as any kind of evidence of God. This is possibly the worst attempt at justifying religious beliefs that I have ever heard. Sure. The sky appears blue sometimes. And sometimes feces appear brown. Just because your feces are brown doesn't mean Goddidit.
 
Last edited:
Iacchus said:
No, the brain is an apparatus. Consciousness is not.
Click to expand...

Yes. The brain is an apparatus, which consciousness is not. It just doesn't happen to be an apparatus that I would consider analogous to a TV set, nor is consciousness a phenomenon I would consider to be analagous to the broadcast signal that TV sets are designed to receive and decode. The term "apparatus" can apply to a supercomputer or a pencil sharpener. It isn't informative, and the TV analogy is just sloppy. You have presented no useful evidence or logical explanation to explain why consciousness is not the output of the apparatus itself.

The Iacchus TV: long warmup time, still no raster.
 
Iacchus said:
Well, yes, I'm sure that we can deny the phenomenon, "the sky," exists (independent of each of our perceptions that is) but, what would be the point to that?
Click to expand...
Well, since no one did but you, I hope you would explain why sometime.

Your comprehension skills are, as ever, as sharp as a bowling ball.
 
Iacchus said:
Well, obviously that part of us which is separate from and, aware of the sensory data is not one and the same. This is the part that we acknowledge as being "conscious" ... albeit there seems to be no means of differentiating between it and our "experience" of the sensory data. In other words the two seemed to be derived from the same or, a similar source ... an "input signal" in other words.
Click to expand...
If you could translate this into English, I think perhaps more people would appreciate it.

As is, it looks like you are saying they are not one and the same, but there is no means of differentiating. But that would be silly.

Oh, wait. It is what you said.
 
Tricky said:
Me and Kiless got a boomer, outback in Flame Wars, mate.

Well I admit. I cheat. But what's a Seppo to do?
Click to expand...

bash.gif
WE. DON'T. SAY. THOSE. PHRASES. HERE!!!!


:kangaroo:
 
Tricky said:
I know this sounds silly to you, but I don't regard your ability to perceive color as any kind of evidence of God. This is possibly the worst attempt at justifying religious beliefs that I have ever heard. Sure. The sky appears blue sometimes. And sometimes feces appear brown. Just because your feces are brown doesn't mean Goddidit.
Click to expand...
Am merely suggesting that some things are quite plain. Take for example my middle name. Would you care to take a guess? I know what I know ...
 
Merc said:
There is no problem that is solved by "consciousness signals", and if there were, consciousness signals would not be the solution to that problem. There is no evidence for them, no phenomenon explained by them, no need to consider them as anything more than the product of some mushroom-induced hallucination.
Click to expand...
There is no problem that reality TV solves, either, yet there it is.

Iacchus said:
So, what about the "signals" that the brain picks up with respect to sensory data? Isn't this very much a part of our "conscious experience?" Now, I'm merely proposing that the brain is picking up some "additional" signals from some place else ... No doubt exterior to the brain, however.
Click to expand...
To paraphrase Mercutio: And why do we need this hypothesis?

~~ Paul
 
Iacchus said:
What, consciousness "just" happens?
Click to expand...
In some cases, it seems it only just happens. In others, apparently, not quite. ;)

But more seriously, why suggest that consciousness originates anywhere other than the brain? What evidence is there supporting the idea? Why do you consider the idea of consciousness "just happening" a problem, or unlikely?
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
In some cases, it seems it only just happens. In others, apparently, not quite. ;)

But more seriously, why suggest that consciousness originates anywhere other than the brain? What evidence is there supporting the idea? Why do you consider the idea of consciousness "just happening" a problem, or unlikely?
Click to expand...
Yes, but that doesn't explain why the sensation of "self" seems to be "mixed", if you will, with our experience derived from the sensations of external world? How is it possible to mix them if there wasn't something very similar about them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom