Evidence for... (consciousness, materialism)

[BillyJoe]

REGARDING ILLUSIONS

Ian has a TRICK COIN that comes up HEADS everytime. This is easy because his trick coin is DOUBLE-HEADED.
But there is also a MAGIC COIN. It has THREE SIDES, all different, and any one of them can come up whenever you wish.

SIDE 1: Everything is an Illusion
The idea that light comes out of your eyes so that you can see what's out there is dead.
The idea that there is a "theatre" in the brain where you can see exactly what's out there is dead.
Light enters your eyes and a cascade of processes results in a representation in your brain of what's out there.
It is in this sense that "everything is an illusion".

SIDE 2: The Optical Illusion.
Different features are represented in different areas of the brain and sometimes this results in totally inaccurate representations.
Sometimes we "see" two different shades of grey where the shades are actually identical.
Sometimes we "see" a coloured square where there is actually no square at all.

SIDE 3: The User Illusion (The Mind's I)
In it's interaction with the outside world, it became a survival advantage for the brain to have a representation of itself. The brain's "I" became the most important feature of the brain and became so highly developed that if seemed as if the "I" had become separate from the brain using the brain for it's own ends.
This is the user illusion.

What takes your fancy?
Ian's double-headed trick coin or BillyJoe's triple-sided magic coin?

regards,
BillyJoe

 

[Lord Kenneth]

Which is of course, backwards.

The only thing you ACTUALLY have any evidence for is your own qualia i.e. CONSCIOUSNESS. Everything else really is just speculation.....but we have been here before....yawn.

So we have no observation?

Can I have evidence for my personality? Is personality part of conciousness?

Can conciousness exist if whatever has it cannot think?

 

[jj]

Which is of course, backwards.

The only thing you ACTUALLY have any evidence for is your own qualia i.e. CONSCIOUSNESS. Everything else really is just speculation.....but we have been here before....yawn.

Yes, and since everything doesn't go the way I would prefer, I can easily reject that ultimate solipcism, which leaves me with, of course, the conclusion that external reality exists. The alternative would be to accept that Hammegk was my evil id.

Next, please.

 

[hammegk]

The alternative would be to accept that Hammegk was my evil id.

Next, please.

I think it more likely you are my anima.

However, again, the only certain way to avoid solipsism under any metaphysic is by gentlemens' agreement.

 

[jj]

I think it more likely you are my anima.

However, again, the only certain way to avoid solipsism under any metaphysic is by gentlemens' agreement.

Could we both be Win's superego?

 

[Guest]

So we have no observation?

Observation is consciousness!

Can conciousness exist if whatever has it cannot think?

Don't understand the question. Does a fish "think"?

 

[Guest]

Yes, and since everything doesn't go the way I would prefer, I can easily reject that ultimate solipcism, which leaves me with, of course, the conclusion that external reality exists. The alternative would be to accept that Hammegk was my evil id.

Next, please.

Solipsism is not the same thing as idealism.

Next Please.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

Observation is consciousness!



Don't understand the question. Does a fish "think"?

1. So how can a plant have conciousness, if it has no brain or nervous system of sorts to allow it to observe things?

What about thinking? Is that conciousness, a part of conciousness, or a product of conciousness?

Or, is conciousness a product of thinking, or being able to think?

2. The question is, "Can conciousness exist in something which cannot think?"

 

[Guest]

DC:

So how can a plant have conciousness, if it has no brain or nervous system of sorts to allow it to observe things?

What about thinking? Is that conciousness, a part of conciousness, or a product of conciousness?

Or, is conciousness a product of thinking, or being able to think?

2. The question is, "Can conciousness exist in something which cannot think?"

What is meant by "think"?

The calculations?
The qualia?
Both?
Does a silcon-based neural net "think"?
Can you "think" without language?

I would say the answer is yes - a fish is conscious but does not "think".

 

[jj]

Solipsism is not the same thing as idealism.

Next Please.

Irrelevant and misleading.

We were discussing the "proof" of external entities to ourselves.

You're further proof. I could never imagine you.

 

[Lord Kenneth]

DC:



What is meant by "think"?

The calculations?
The qualia?
Both?
Does a silcon-based neural net "think"?
Can you "think" without language?

I would say the answer is yes - a fish is conscious but does not "think".

Think, as in, ideas and thought-processes...

 

[Lord Kenneth]

And I would say a fish does think, although primitively, and not nearly to the level of a human does.

However, a Jellyfish, I think does not.