Physicalism is not identical to eliminativism.
— Pfhorrest

No, but it is usually implied by it. — bongo fury

Which direction do you mean that implication to go? — Pfhorrest

Eliminativism is the view that consciousness is not real — bert1

Ok, so "first person perspective" wasn't some innocuous physical concept to do with frames of reference.
— bongo fury

I , as a panpsychist, think it is. — Pfhorrest

It’s only emergentism that makes it out to be anything metaphysically weird. — Pfhorrest

not invoking anything in addition to physical stuff, just a different perspective on that physical stuff. — Pfhorrest

Physicalism is not identical to eliminativism. — Pfhorrest

That person is not providing any answer at all to the question of phenomenal consciousness. — Pfhorrest

We don’t know if they think there is no such thing, — Pfhorrest

if it somehow emerges from nothing — Pfhorrest

And this perspective was already on the physicist's menu, or not?
— bongo fury

It depends on the physicist’s philosophical views. — Pfhorrest

some mysterious metaphysical having of a first person perspective — Pfhorrest

If he’s an eliminativist — Pfhorrest

then no, he denies that there is such a thing. — Pfhorrest

If he’s an emergentist then yes, — Pfhorrest

some mysterious metaphysical having of a first person perspective — Pfhorrest

where that completely different metaphysical thing started happening — Pfhorrest

Panpsychism simply says that... — Pfhorrest

No, I think it has already also required,

"some mysterious metaphysical having of a first person perspective"
— Pfhorrest

but doesn't seem keen to admit it. — bongo fury

It says that there is a first person perspective that is had, — Pfhorrest

Panpsychism simply says that [...] — Pfhorrest

some mysterious metaphysical having of a first person perspective — Pfhorrest

It [panpsychism] “explains” why my socks and bubblegum are conscious, even though no one thought they were, but it doesn’t explain why the human brain is conscious the way the human brain is conscious, which is what we actually want to know. — Zelebg

So what we think of a as — Pantagruel

then you can begin to see how immaterial things can participate in what we call consciousness — Pantagruel

I actually felt sorry for him! This sounds exactly like a machine figuring out that this whole consciousness thing was just something it was programmed to espouse. — hypericin

Sometimes a psychologist's most assiduous accounts of phenomena of mental imagery have the flavor of tracts by impassioned believers in flying saucers. — Goodman: Sights Unseen

The 'image' and the 'picture in the mind' have vanished; mythical inventions have been beneficially excised. — Goodman: Sights Unseen

After we spend an hour or so at one or another exhibition of abstract painting, everything tends to square off into geometric patches or swirl in circles or weave into textural arabesques, to sharpen into black and white or vibrate with new color consonances and dissonances." — Goodman: Ways of Worldmaking

You might find this old thread interesting : https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/1308/aphantasia-and-p-zombies/p1 — csalisbury

Here's an account by a man who, at 30 years old, realized that other people could visualize things without seeing them.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/blake-ross/aphantasia-how-it-feels-to-be-blind-in-your-mind/10156834777480504/

He never could, and was unaware that anybody else could. He thought that phrases like 'mind's eye,' were figures of speech.

The medical term for this condition is called aphantasia. — The Great Whatever

How our lookings at pictures and our listenings to music inform what we encounter later and elsewhere is integral to them as cognitive. Music can inform perception not only of other sounds but also of the rhythms and patterns of what we see. Such cross-transference of structural properties seems to me a basic and important aspect of learning, not merely a matter for novel experimentation by composers, dancers, and painters. — Goodman: Languages of Art

I am not sure if Dennett's is an anti-representationalist stance. — Graeme M

There is no mirroring going on. — jamalrob

find the concept so incredulous. — Isaac

Perhaps what the salient parts of the disagreement are depend on what camp you're in? A difference that looks different from both sides. — fdrake

That's the question that's being asked. Is that thing that's missing for people with blindsight something that happens "in the head" of the rest of us or is it a property of the external world object? — Michael

that thing that's missing in cases of blindsight — Michael

What are dreams? — Harry Hindu

It wer a col nite but we wer warm in that doss bag. Lissening to the dogs howling aftrwds and the wind wuthering and wearying and nattering in the oak leaves. Looking at the moon all col and wite and oansome. Lorna said to me, "You know Riddley theres some thing in us it dont have no name."

I said, "What thing is that?"

She said, "Its some kynd of thing it aint us but yet its in us. Its looking out thru our eye hoals. May be you dont take no noatis of it only some times. Say you get woak up suddn in the middl of the nite. 1 minim youre a sleap and the nex youre on your feet with a spear in your han. Wel it wernt you put that spear in your han it wer that other thing whats looking out thru your eye hoals. It aint you nor it dont even know your name. Its in us lorn and loan and sheltering how it can."

I said, "If its in every 1 of us theres moren 1 of it theres got to be a manying theres got to be a millying and mor."

Lorna said, "Wel there is a millying and mor."

I said, "Wel if theres such a manying of it whys it lorn then whys it loan?"

She said, "Becaws the manying and the millying its all 1 thing it dont have nothing to gether with. You look at lykens on a stoan its all them tiny manyings of it and may be each part of it myt think its sepert only we can see its all 1 thing. Thats how it is with what we are its all 1 girt big thing and divvyt up amongst the many. Its all 1 girt thing bigger nor the won and lorn and loan and oansome. Tremmering it is and feart. It puts us on like we put on our does. Some times we dont fit. Some times it cant fynd the arm hoals and it tears us a part. I dont think I took all that much noatis of it when I ben yung. Now Im old I noatis it mor. It dont realy like to put me on no mor. Every morning I can feal how its tiret of me and readying to throw me a way. Iwl tel you some thing Riddley and keap this in memberment. What ever it is we dont come naturel to it."

I said, "Lorna I dont know what you mean."

She said, "We aint a naturel part of it. We dint begin when it begun we dint begin where it begun. It ben here befor us nor I dont know what we are to it. May be weare jus only sickness and a feaver to it or boyls on the arse of it I dont know. Now lissen what Im going to tel you Riddley. It thinks us but it dont think like us. It dont think the way we think. Plus like I said befor its afeart."

I said, "Whats it afeart of?"

She said, "Its afeart of being beartht."

I said, "How can that be? You said it ben here befor us. If it ben here all this time it musve ben beartht some time."

She said, "No it aint ben beartht it never does get beartht its all ways in the woom of things its all ways on the road."

I said, "All this what you jus ben telling be that a tel for me?"

She larft then she said, "Riddley there aint nothing what aint a tel for you. The wind in the nite the dus on the road even the leases stoan you kick a long in front of you. Even the shadder of that leases stoan roaling on or stanning stil its all telling."

Wel I cant say for cern no mor if I had any of them things in my mynd befor she tol me but ever since then it seams like they all ways ben there. Seams like I ben all ways thinking on that thing in us what thinks us but it dont think like us. Our woal life is a idear we dint think of nor we dont know what it is. What a way to live.

Thats why I finely come to writing all this down. Thinking on what the idear of us myt be. Thinking on that thing whats in us lorn and loan and oansome.

— Russell Hoban: Riddley Walker

Misstatement? — frank

The problem is stated as "The set of all sets that do not contain themselves as subsets members." — EnPassant

I think this is the correct answer from Snakes Alive: — frank

All sets that do not... — EnPassant

The entity — EnPassant

The problem is stated as "The set of all sets that do not contain themselves as subsets members." — EnPassant

Subset is transitive — EnPassant

I am not asking why a banana is a banana. — bizso09

Conflict Resolution

Let us start by supposing that there are two opposing opinions on some matter. Is there a tried and true universally applicable method of determining for ourselves what's best to believe regarding the subject matter? — creativesoul

Common sense — fdrake

The First Chair

A small
Rickety
Wooden chair

Sits in
The shadowy
Corner. — I like sushi

The ‘First Chair’ here is, funnily enough, a means to furnish a narrative — I like sushi

that reveals something intrinsically human about our modes of thinking and how they adapt. No one really thinks there was some ‘First Chair,’ a eureka moment where an inspired carpenter rushed to their workshop to fashion their furniture idea. — I like sushi

Such is merely a flight of fancy to highlight — I like sushi

how humans have explored the space they’ve found themselves a part of, and apart from, and managed to extract and contain this space in varying states of permanence through which a common yet often unconscious need has expressed itself and perpetuated through multiple cultural iterations. — I like sushi

What would it have been to a human to create the very ‘First Chair’? Not merely to select a spot and sit down, but to actually fashion an item meant for the sole purpose of planting one’s posterior on. — I like sushi

We could imagine a scene, millennia ago, where humans congregated at the day’s end to partake in social relations. They undoubtedly rested in this period, and therefore likely sat rather than stood. Would they have always sat in the same position or order relative to their fellows? Would that day’s achiever have had first choice of spot? Was there a strong social hierarchy involved that was symbolically reflected by each person’s position within the group? — I like sushi

Given the sparse dispersion of prehistoric humans it seems reasonable to assume — I like sushi

that different cultural habits would’ve emerged where some tribe’s members — I like sushi

attached social value to ‘sitting positions’ as a marker for status, and others would’ve perhaps have been mostly, if not completely, unconcerned with such habits and rituals of daily social life. — I like sushi

Such daily social occasions are clearly of high import to human society due to their frequency, — I like sushi

A nomadic lifestyle would mean prehistoric tribes would likely have only carried what was deemed ‘necessary’. A Chair would probably not have been deemed ‘necessary,’ — I like sushi

but soft materials to sit on and possibly a piece of material for support (be it a tool/weapon of some description) to form a more ‘purposeful’ sitting space: still, not a ‘chair’. To have meaningfully constructed a ‘chair’ would be something quite different. — I like sushi

the above is clearer. Hopefully? — Moliere

the way the composer designed it to be heard — Julia

time’s up! — I like sushi

Let's go along with this. The identity of a musical artwork is a set or class of sound-events identified through notation, recording, or both. — Moliere

So we could say, in the above that we heard the entire piece, at least. — Moliere

I like how you [@TheMadFool] point out that when we push pause we're introducing something to our experience which the composer also uses in the artwork. That would be why the visual division served as analogue -- because the artist uses space in the case of paintings. — Moliere

Still, I think I'm being won over by the identity theory posited by bongo fury, for now at least. — Moliere

Whereas pausing it does introduce a significant difference to the work of art, — Moliere

the identity of the work of art is unchanged by my pausing it and starting it back up again. — Moliere

It's interesting to me to think of music in these two different categories - the notational vs recorded — Moliere

someone who has an ear for a particular orchestra or conductor likely has more narrow limits to someone who is just passingly familiar with some orchestral work. — Moliere

Any clue what I'm on about? — ztaziz

I wouldn't have noticed this pattern on listen 1? — ztaziz

What then? — jamalrob

I've never experienced a musical piece being aired on TV being interrupted by ads. [irony]Maybe they're too short[/irony] or [understatement]maybe[/understatement] the producers intuit that any interruption to a piece of music amounts to altering it. — TheMadFool

No — Noble Dust

yes you did hear the entire piece. That is to say every audible bit of it did reach your eardrums and your brain did process it. — Outlander

Often people differentiate between hearing and listening. — Outlander

But I wonder if there's some conceptual dimension here -- — Moliere

-- like, is there something that spells out what a complete work is? — Moliere

Did you hear the entire piece? — Moliere

I find it interesting that you think that information only comes in the form of images, data, words, and symbols. — Harry Hindu

What about neural firings? Is that information in the brain? — Harry Hindu

If so, then information about what? — Harry Hindu

Can neural firings be about the location of an apple relative to your body? — Harry Hindu

How? — Harry Hindu

It seems like you are confusing your sensitivity (the symbol) with the location (the symbolized). — Harry Hindu

Sounds like symbolism to me. Cue is just another name for symbol/signal. — Harry Hindu

Is the cue the same thing as the state of the environment, or are they different things? — Harry Hindu

Are you a solipsist? — Harry Hindu

But you said that the illusion of consciousness doesn't happen. Is an illusion something that happens? — Harry Hindu

I agree that the fact that we think that, or entertain the illusion that, we have mental images does deserve explanation, yes. Hence my attempt at that. On the other hand, I can't agree that it's a fact that we have mental illusions in the form of mental images. — bongo fury

what are you talking about when you talk about "habits of interpretation" and "thinking in symbols"? — Harry Hindu

thinking in (as in, preparing to select or manipulate) symbols. — bongo fury

What is a mirage? How do you explain an illusion of a mirage within the illusion of consciousness using neural firings? — Harry Hindu

Would you agree that the information in your "brain" includes objects' location relative to your brain, — Harry Hindu

Pleasant and informative could apply to a mind with images. — Harry Hindu

I need a description that couldn't be interpreted to apply to minds with images, because you say those things don't happen. What is discerning patterns in the images and other objects around you like? — Harry Hindu

What is a view? — Harry Hindu

What is looking at this screen like for you? — Harry Hindu