Well, clearly consciousness. Some sort of first person perspective that the person possessing the arm has. Some sort of feeling of what it's like to be that person (ouch!!!). — schopenhauer1
There are no problems before consciousness. — schopenhauer1
I hope and trust that adult humans would find it difficult to damage an extremely realistic babydoll. I suspect that, even if they rationally knew it wasn't alive, there would be resistance.
In reverse, a computer that passed the Turing test (etc) would be easier to 'kill' because it lacked a lovable relatable mammalian body. — plaque flag
A p-zombie's head getting ripped off, would only matter in as far as there is an experience of a head getting ripped off. If there is none, it is like a rock being broken, nothing more or less. Rather,it is cultural and habit to care for something that looks like it feels something. It is not actually happening though in the sense of an internal feeling to that p-zombie though. — schopenhauer1
I suggest that the training is much deeper than that. If pushed, then (if we are philosophers) we rationalize this training. — plaque flag
Before life perhaps. Problems are in the way, a way. Life is directed toward food and reproduction. [ Don't plants hurt ? I don't know. We don't hesitate to cut and burn them. ] — plaque flag
Rather,it is cultural and habit to care for something that looks like it feels something. — schopenhauer1
Does the plant experience no water, or is it simply not having enough water? — schopenhauer1
Most Some of us tend to treat plants without much care, but my wife is sad when a plant dies though, and she sometimes feels guilt for not watering or sunning it properly. — plaque flag
If plants aren't conscious, do they have "problems"? Does reproduction and fitness not occurring present a problem or another event like a rock breaking? — schopenhauer1
What about reproduction, eating, and death but without a first person perspective makes something valuable or invaluable. I mean, we evaluate it from the perspective of someone who experiences. — schopenhauer1
Both objects and subjects (i.e. phenomenally self-referring/reflexive objects) are emergent "effects of the universe" ... neither of which "matter" on the cosmic scale. "Consciousness" seems the phenomenal illusion of being 'more than an object', even somehow separate / alienated from the rest of universe of objects – more bug than feature; I think, instead of "consciousness", adaptive intelligence (by which knowledge of the universe is created) is the property, or functionality, that distinguishes mere objects from mattering objects.The nexus between an object being bombarded by effects of the universe and and an object being bombarded by effects that matters is consciousness. — schopenhauer1
I'd say a problem within a teleological projection. — plaque flag
I think we agree that giving-a-damn is central to human being-there. We are temporal because we want stuff, fear stuff, seek stuff. 'Want' and 'fear' are like projections of an interior. So we can say we seek and avoid. We learn from getting hurt, getting food. We 'remember' (find shorter, safer paths, etc.) — plaque flag
Both objects and subjects (i.e. phenomenally self-referring/reflexive objects) are emergent "effects of the universe" ... neither of which "matter" on the cosmic scale. — 180 Proof
"Consciousness" seems the phenomenal illusion of being 'more than an object', even somehow separate / alienated from the rest of universe of objects – more bug than feature; I think, instead of "consciousness", adaptive intelligence (by which knowledge of the universe is created) is the property, or functionality, that distinguishes mere objects from mattering objects. — 180 Proof
And this "matters ... to a subject" doesn't matter.Nothing matters in the universe other than some relation to a subject. — schopenhauer1
Obviously I think it does. Consciousness =/= adaptive intelligence, especially in the context in which I've used these terms.Does changing the word to adaptive intelligence change much?
Do teleological projections have problems, or do agents have problems? — schopenhauer1
Are they agents if there is no perspective there? — schopenhauer1
There is a subject this is happening to.. a perspective in the first place. — schopenhauer1
A subject however, is where "matter" and "value" come into play. — schopenhauer1
And this "matters ... to a subject" doesn't matter. — 180 Proof
Obviously I think it does. Consciousness =/= adaptive intelligence, especially in the context in which I've used these terms. — 180 Proof
It is just events eventing. The problems (literally) start with experiences, and mattering. I am not being literary. There are no problems before consciousness. — schopenhauer1
As I see it, there is a body which is trained into being something like a subject. The world is 'there' for this creature. — plaque flag
We can take an external view and look at patterns that stubbornly resist being erased. The pattern doesn't 'want' to die. It'll sacrifice instantiations. Schopenhauer's insect is ready to die, having laid its eggs. — plaque flag
What you are saying is almost tautological, which doesn't mean it's not worth saying. We could also just talk of the possibility of feeling hurt. Feeling is first. But feeling is 'under' or 'other than' concepts. So it's difficult to say it. Maybe this is why Schopenhauer claimed we knew the heart of reality directly. — plaque flag
What makes it different than other events in the universe if it is just patterns without an internalness to it? — schopenhauer1
Illusions that are not explained etc. — schopenhauer1
Even here we are mostly on the same page. The hard problem is interesting, but I think there's a semantic problem which gets taken for granted : people don't know what they mean by 'consciousness' in a metaphysical context. — plaque flag
Slightly more complex enduring patterns. Why give primacy to photosynthesis over the strong force? — schopenhauer1
It's a hard problem in that we know that there are things that don't sense the sky as "blue" or sense at all and we know there are things that sense — schopenhauer1
Life climbs a ladder. It 'shits' more disorder than it creates. We are flowers of the death of the sun. — plaque flag
I don't think we know this, but most of us feel/think it in some sense. We nurture our young. Our doings are deeper than our rationalizations. — plaque flag
No I get that this may be a definition of life, but I mean, what makes it have more primacy than any other event? — schopenhauer1
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.