Are You Conscious?

[Ron_Tomkins]

I was unconscious a couple hours ago when I had still not awoken.

Now I'm conscious.

Funny, though.... Now that I am conscious I can answer questions about when I was unconscious. That can't really happen the other way around, however.

 

[Hokulele]

If you believe Malerin is being dishonest and that he's going to pull some rhetorical trick, then why not simply say "I'm not going to answer that because you're just going to pull a silly rhetorical trick so it's a waste of my time"?

Considering how he and plumjam are chortling over the fact that roughly half the respondents "Can't confirm they are conscious! Snicker!", I would say that the OP and following comments are a fine display of why definitions are necessary. The whole point of language is to find common ground for communication, so the fact that it can be used to find the opposite is, well, amusing to me.

 

[Malerin]

Considering how he and plumjam are chortling over the fact that roughly half the respondents "Can't confirm they are conscious! Snicker!", I would say that the OP and following comments are a fine display of why definitions are necessary. The whole point of language is to find common ground for communication, so the fact that it can be used to find the opposite is, well, amusing to me.

It IS funny. But I had no idea half the people here weren't sure they were conscious. I thought there were only a couple.

 

[Mercutio]

It IS funny. But I had no idea half the people here weren't sure they were conscious. I thought there were only a couple.

Perhaps it is a sign of a poorly-phrased question. That is certainly the parsimonious explanation.

 

[Darth Rotor]

If this were an Interesting Ian thread, or worse, an Iacchus thread, consciousness would have already been defined, as PixyMisa warned just a bit ago "involving qualia, or invoking dualism, or consciousness idealism, or the Cartesian theatre, or any of the other sillyness thrown around in these forums over the past few years". In that case, I would have to say answer "yes, I am unconscious, by your definition."

Sadly for whatever it is you are driving at, you could not be unconscious and type that response.

Let's try this again: I ask, on this forum, by typing, "Are you unconscious" and if I am to get a reply, it can only be no.

Do you agree with this? Operating assumption: someone else is not logged into your account.

DR

 

[Darat]

So... you claim to be something that is indistinguishable in all respects to every other normal human being. Which means you claim to be someone who is conscious while you participate on this forum. So your answer to "Are you conscious?" is "Yes".

Ok then.

Despite you trying to put words in my mouth my answer remains the same as when I first posted it:

As the word is commonly used in my language community - yes; as it is often used in threads in this section of the Forum - no, I am a m-zombie.

 

[Darat]

Are you saying they were unconscious at the time, or that they had no memory of having posted?
...snip..

I suggest you try and come to your own conclusion.

 

[Darat]

If you are, in fact, a man, then when someone asks "Are you a man?" the answer must be "Yes". If someone else says you're not, then they're wrong, and their being wrong doesn't mean you now have to answer "Damned if I know."

As for attempting to drag other threads into it, I suppose you can do that if you like, but that doesn't change the fact that we are, in fact, conscious human beings if we're participating on this forum, and that p-zombies are a hypothetical convenience.

Some people's definition of man includes someone who has sex with women - by that definition I am not a man. Unless I can either tell from the context/situation what definition someone is using or they provide a definition I can't actually answer their question.

Piggy are you gazongs?

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Funny, though.... Now that I am conscious I can answer questions about when I was unconscious. That can't really happen the other way around, however.

I had one of my unfortunately much too frequent colonoscopies a few weeks back, for the first time I had sedation, during and just afterwards I held conversations in which I (the I that is "experiencing" typing this post) certainly was not present. So it would seem that when I was (for some definitions) unconscious I can indeed answers questions such as "Are you conscious?" with a "coherent" response.

 

[Mercutio]

Sadly for whatever it is you are driving at, you could not be unconscious and type that response.

Let's try this again: I ask, on this forum, by typing, "Are you unconscious" and if I am to get a reply, it can only be no.

Do you agree with this? Operating assumption: someone else is not logged into your account.

DR

Unless I am not following you, then I could indeed answer yes. If consciousness has been defined by Interesting Ian, I would have to answer yes. For some others, the answer is clearly no. Without any definitions, the answer would be maybe.

I would suggest that "non-conscious" would be clearer than "unconscious" in this case. "Unconscious" has either "knocked out" or Freudian baggage. So it is not merely the negation of "conscious". (BTW, to a very real extent, a Freudian would have to be tempted to answer "yes"--meaning that my actions, including answering, are motivated unconsciously.)

The simple question is too simple for this forum. Context matters. Definitions matter.

 

[Darat]

Sadly for whatever it is you are driving at, you could not be unconscious and type that response.

Let's try this again: I ask, on this forum, by typing, "Are you unconscious" and if I am to get a reply, it can only be no.

Do you agree with this? Operating assumption: someone else is not logged into your account.

DR

See my comments about my experience under sedation and someone's comments about how they posted when under medical treatment - from that it would seem to me that you could post to this thread, even wit ha "yes" and in fact not be accurate!

Another example would be sleep walking and associated activities (can't recall the correct phrase) - people are said to be able hold limited conversations and even carry out quite complex tasks (I believe even driving?!) yet using the common definition of my language community we would not say that they were conscious.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Real men keep their women subservient, and beat them soundly if they dare to speak up. Real men urinate against walls, in public. Real men are racist, sexist, homophobic, red-blooded males.

Are you a man?

Is this not a bit of bait and switch here, Merc?

You go to some lengths to frame a presumed "real man" but you then ask Piggy "are you a man" without retaining the real.

Let's try this to demonstrate what you did.

Orange Julius is a drink made with orange color and the flavor of an orange.

Are you drinking a Julius?

Details matter. You quite simply tripped yourself there.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

See my comments about my experience under sedation and someone's comments about how they posted when under medical treatment - from that it would seem to me that you could post to this thread, even wit ha "yes" and in fact not be accurate!

Conscious is not an on off switch. You can be conscious and be degraded, so the excuse offered to you in no way mitigates the poster being conscious, even if in a somewhat degraded. See also PWD.

Another example would be sleep walking and associated activities (can't recall the correct phrase)

Rubbish. The sleep walker doesn't read the post asking the question.

DR

 

[Mercutio]

Is this not a bit of bait and switch here, Merc?

You go to some lengths to frame a presumed "real man" but you then ask Piggy "are you a man" without retaining the real.

Let's try this to demonstrate the silliness of what you did.

Orange Julius is a drink made wth orange color and the flavor of an orange.

Are you drinking a Julius?

Details matter. You quite simply tripped yourself there.

DR

No, it was quite intentional. I am fully aware that the "real" was dropped. This thread did not explicitly link to other threads, so keeping the "real" would have changed the analogy. A very general question can be put into a context where its meaning has changed. It is, by itself, a very simple question; it is, by virtue of context, a very different thing. That was my point.

 

[Dunstan]

That doesn't change the fact that we're all conscious human beings, which means the answer to the OP is "Yes" for everybody here.

Your suspicions about what Malerin intends to say about that answer are immaterial, as are other threads.

But according to you, this entire thread is immaterial. Since you "know" that there is only one correct answer for everyone, then the poll and the thread are a pointless exercise. In fact, you should probably report it to the mods as spam. You certainly shouldn't be chastising Mercutio or anyone else for contributing "immaterial" responses.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Unless I am not following you, then I could indeed answer yes.

For what values of unconscious can you be able to answer yes to that by typing it on a keyboard?

(Is there a link to this Interesting Ian def that you have handy? )

DR

 

[Darat]

...snip..

Rubbish. The sleep walker doesn't read the post asking the question.

DR

So who is driving the car?

 

[Darth Rotor]

So who is driving the car?

Would you care to stay on topic?

 

[Dancing David]

Are you claiming to actually be in such a state when responding to the OP on this forum?

Why do you ask? I made myself rather clear. I have posted on the forum when I was not exactly conscious.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

I had one of my unfortunately much too frequent colonoscopies a few weeks back, for the first time I had sedation, during and just afterwards I held conversations in which I (the I that is "experiencing" typing this post) certainly was not present. So it would seem that when I was (for some definitions) unconscious I can indeed answers questions such as "Are you conscious?" with a "coherent" response.

True.

So how do we falsify this little issue then?