Are You Conscious?

[Dancing David]

My sophistry is so powerful I can cloud men's minds to the point they don't even know say if they're conscious or not!

Who knows assumes what qualia lurk in the minds of behavioralists? Malerin do! Muhahahaha!

Only for contrast of POVs.

 

[Piggy]

Are you fully concious of the position of your joints? Propioception, pressure and stretch receptors and other sensations are subconciously processed and you are only conciously aware of the already processed data. Even then, you don't conciously know where all your limbs are at all time but it magically coodinates itself.

Is being awake and talking but having zero memory of the conversation you just have with someone concious?

Like I said. Conciousness is complex.

But that wasn't the question.

Again, I don't know of any common definition of the term that would allow anyone to answer anything but "Yes".

 

[paximperium]

But that wasn't the question.

Are you sure?

Again, I don't know of any common definition of the term that would allow anyone to answer anything but "Yes".

Sorry but is the OP talking about the "common" definition? How does p-zombie play into the common definition?

You will notice he refuses to ever define what he means by conscious. He's playing a semantic game.

 

[Piggy]

Are you sure?
Sorry but is the OP talking about the "common" definition? How does p-zombie play into the common definition?

You will notice he refuses to ever define what he means by conscious. He's playing a semantic game.

None of what you're saying makes any difference.

I am not aware -- and I don't believe you are either -- of any common definition of "conscious" which would allow anyone actually posting on this forum to answer anything but "Yes" to that question.

You say the OP's intent was to attempt to turn the tables later on. Maybe so. But if so, then his error could be pointed out at that time.

It doesn't change the fact that anyone posting on this thread will certainly be conscious at the time of doing so.

Therefore, calling for a definition seems pointless.

YMMV

 

[Mercutio]

But that wasn't the question.

Again, I don't know of any common definition of the term that would allow anyone to answer anything but "Yes".

Common? Perhaps. But I could very easily answer "I, nor you, nor anyone, have any way of knowing." Which, if we apply a sort of burden of proof, we can state as a provisional "no", barring some incredible argument.

As a hint, lemme ask: How is it that you learned what consciousness is? Could anyone have shown you theirs? Or pointed out yours? Setting your own experience aside, could anyone ever have shown another person theirs? Or had theirs pointed out by another?

Unless you are defining consciousness via publicly observable behavior (I may well be the only one here even suggesting such a thing; I've been gone for a bit, so I don't quite know), I think those questions will be problematic.

It's not that there are not common definitions. It is, rather, that none of them make sense.

 

[Malerin]

Common? Perhaps. But I could very easily answer "I, nor you, nor anyone, have any way of knowing." Which, if we apply a sort of burden of proof, we can state as a provisional "no", barring some incredible argument.

You have no way of knowing that you're conscious? Seriously?

 

[Malerin]

Are you sure?
Sorry but is the OP talking about the "common" definition? How does p-zombie play into the common definition?


You will notice he refuses to ever define what he means by conscious. He's playing a semantic game.

As Piggy asks, what definition of conscious can you think of that would make you doubt you're conscious?

 

[Piggy]

Common? Perhaps. But I could very easily answer "I, nor you, nor anyone, have any way of knowing." Which, if we apply a sort of burden of proof, we can state as a provisional "no", barring some incredible argument.

As a hint, lemme ask: How is it that you learned what consciousness is? Could anyone have shown you theirs? Or pointed out yours? Setting your own experience aside, could anyone ever have shown another person theirs? Or had theirs pointed out by another?

Unless you are defining consciousness via publicly observable behavior (I may well be the only one here even suggesting such a thing; I've been gone for a bit, so I don't quite know), I think those questions will be problematic.

It's not that there are not common definitions. It is, rather, that none of them make sense.

"Just asking questions", I see.

And again with the "how did you learn" red herring, which has no bearing on the question.

By any commonly accepted definition of "conscious", the answer must be "yes" for anyone posting on this forum, so a definition is not required to answer the question.

Which is why no one here can actually provide a generally accepted definition of "conscious" which would allow a "no", except a specially qualified one (such as "socially conscious") which is not implied in the OP.

The demand for a definition in this case is silly.

It is not silly by any means in all cases, but for this thread, it's nothing but theater.

 

[Mercutio]

You have no way of knowing that you're conscious? Seriously?

Care to define your term? Until you do, none of us have any way of knowing, whether or not we think we do.

 

[Mercutio]

"Just asking questions", I see.

Not at all, I assure you.

And again with the "how did you learn" red herring, which has no bearing on the question.

Then (again, I assure you), you do not understand.

By any commonly accepted definition of "conscious", the answer must be "yes" for anyone posting on this forum, so a definition is not required to answer the question.

Not if the definition is incoherent. There are many reasons one would say "yes". If one says "yes" without actually understanding the question, does it count? If one says "yes" because one has a different definition than the questioner, does it count? How can I know that I have the same definition as the questioner? This is why I ask my question.

Which is why no one here can actually provide a generally accepted definition of "conscious" which would allow a "no", except a specially qualified one (such as "socially conscious") which is not implied in the OP.

I can, but for present purposes I do not need to. The burden is not on me.

The demand for a definition in this case is silly.

Again, I respectfully submit that if you honestly believe this, you have no clue.

It is not silly by any means in all cases, but for this thread, it's nothing but theater.

I am perfectly serious, and believe it to be crucial to the topic. If you wish to ask flawed questions, go ahead. Seems to me nobody has yet determined how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, so you may wish to start there.

 

[Piggy]

Then (again, I assure you), you do not understand.

Of course I understand, Merc, we've been around this block many times.

 

[Piggy]

Not if the definition is incoherent. There are many reasons one would say "yes". If one says "yes" without actually understanding the question, does it count? If one says "yes" because one has a different definition than the questioner, does it count? How can I know that I have the same definition as the questioner? This is why I ask my question.

As I said, all irrelevant, since you can't cite a commonly accepted definition that would allow anyone to answer anything but "Yes".

Now, of course, once that's done, if y'all want to get into any finer points, or argue about what that answer implies, then the definition would matter, but the fact is, no one needs to ask for a definition in order to answer the question.

 

[Piggy]

I can, but for present purposes I do not need to. The burden is not on me.

What burden?

By any commonly accepted definition, your answer must be "Yes", so there is no burden.

You've invented this phony burden out of thin air.

 

[AkuManiMani]

Of course I understand, Merc, we've been around this block many times.

School'em, Piggy!

 

[Piggy]

If you wish to ask flawed questions, go ahead.

What's flawed about the question?

You can take any question you like and ask for a definition of every word in it, then ask for definitions of every word in those definitions, and so on forever.

Asking for definitions only makes sense when they're genuinely needed to answer the question.

Since you haven't shown that any definition is needed in this case, you're dragging out a red herring.

That is, unless you care to explain which particular definition you believe could sway the answer.

 

[Mercutio]

Of course I understand, Merc, we've been around this block many times.

One of these days, you are going to have to cross a street, Piggy.

 

[Mercutio]

As I said, all irrelevant, since you can't cite a commonly accepted definition that would allow anyone to answer anything but "Yes".

"Commonly accepted" where? Within my science? "Consciousness" is seen as circularly defined, and an explanatory fiction.
[/quote]
Now, of course, once that's done, if y'all want to get into any finer points, or argue about what that answer implies, then the definition would matter, but the fact is, no one needs to ask for a definition in order to answer the question.[/QUOTE] "Everybody knows" is, as everybody knows, code for "I don't have a citation for this." (that was a joke.) (but a meaningful and ironic one.) Wittgenstein's remark about sunrise seems appropriate here.

 

[Mercutio]

What burden?

By any commonly accepted definition, your answer must be "Yes", so there is no burden.

You've invented this phony burden out of thin air.

*sigh* Sorry, Piggy. It was an analogy to the burden of proof. This question needs to stand on its own; it should not matter whether someone else can come up with a better question; the current question, as asked, is bad. And, Piggy... it is.

 

[Piggy]

Mercutio, if you can show that there actually are divergent, commonly used meanings of the term which could cause legitimate confusion that would affect the choices offered, then you have some reason to ask for a definition at the outset.

Otherwise, it's a red herring.

You're anticipating a rhetorical trap which may well be planned, but at this point you haven't shown any cause for any definition to be produced.

If I say "Don't you think that's funny?", it makes sense to ask "Do you mean ha-ha funny or weird funny?" because the abmiguity affects the answer.

But in this case, the answer must be "Yes" no matter what.

 

[Piggy]

the current question, as asked, is bad.

What's wrong with it?

It's like asking "Are you alive?" Or "Are you a mammal?" Or "Have you been born?"

The answer is "Yes".