As I understand it a P-Zombie is a philosophical construct; an incoherent one, that is.
It's a human-thing which exhibits all the behaviours of a normal human, so that it is completely indistinguishable from a human, except it doesn't have a consciousness.
But since consciousness is infered from behaviour... if it has all the behaviours then it would be, by definition, conscious and therefore couldn't both have the behaviours and NOT the consciousness. Hence the incoherence.
Not sure I understand your objection. P-zombies were, of course, meant to describe other people, not yourself.
To be clear we're not in the p-zombie world whose existence is all-important to the p-zombie argument.
That this zombie world can be coherently conceived is what matters to the argument.
Consciousness is not inferred from behavior in this zombie world.
Is the zombie world actually possible? I doubt it.
Is it logically impossible for something to have all the detectable external behaviours of something else, and have other, inaccessible behaviours and attributes?
There's a new word floating around and I hadn't noticed. I must be half-asleep!
What's a "P-Zombie"? And is there any chance that I'm one?
Because it sounds kinda cool.
No... and I just disproved physicalism
Or so goes the argument more or less, right?
If we use the most colloquial meaning of conscious, sure. Just being awake means conscious.
But you know well enough that is not what Malerin means when he asks this question since conscious is an exceedingly complex thing.
Spelling mistake: Please note there is a missing 's'.
Oh, sorry.
Don't you know what the definition of "arse" are?
I can never be sure if the outside world is real or even if it exists but I am 100% sure that I am conscious.
Actually, I'm not familiar with Malerin's posting history.
But in any case, I can't see that there is any acceptable definition that would allow anyone posting here to respond "No".
I can never be sure if the outside world is real or even if it exists but I am 100% sure that I am conscious.
He has this weird belief that by defining conciousness into some undefinable magic, it will magic his pathetic god of the gaps into reality. His god seems to only exist in the realm of the stupid.Actually, I'm not familiar with Malerin's posting history.
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.But in any case, I can't see that there is any acceptable definition that would allow anyone posting here to respond "No".
Yup. It is so astoudingly powerful that you can't even define what you are talking about. Bravo.My sophistry is so powerful I can cloud men's minds to the point they don't even know if they're conscious or not!
Who knows what qualia lurk in the minds of behavioralists? Malerin do! Muhahahaha!