• Kmaca
    24
    I experience the exact same thing daily. Sometimes, I wonder why I even read the main stream media at all about academic issues. I guess the reason for me is that often academic writers are terrible at writing but journalists can write well. On the other hand, journalist can’t help but sensationalize especially in the way that their industry is monetized but philosophers care more about the truth represented in its most sober way. In any case, I encourage you to read David Chalmers, Colin McGinn and others on the topic of consciousness. your question was a great starting point. I like Daniel Dennett a lot but I often think that he is harmful to philosophy in general as a profession. He sometimes makes difficult philosophical problems seem a lot more easier than they are.
  • Kmaca
    24
    By the way, if you wanna do me a favor, please check out my podcast. There’s stuff on consciousness but with Hegel and history. I might talk about media representation of philosophy in the future because I think you brought up important point. If it’s OK, could I refer to your comment in it? https://podcasts.apple.com/jp/podcast/on-the-very-idea-a-philosophy-podcast/id1511375679?l=en&i=1000479737894
  • Enai De A Lukal
    211
    Yikes. Dennett, in 2017: "I'm not saying that consciousness doesn't exist. I'm just saying it isn't what you think it is."

    So, not what you evidently think. Read the Stanford article fdrake linked. Its good and informative, as per usual- the Stanford philosophy encyclopedia is an excellent resource. You might not be any more inclined to accept eliminativism, but at the very least you will hopefully become acquainted with what it does (and does not) claim, and on what basis it does so.. which probably would have been advisable before posting a silly strawman thread on the subject, but hey better late than never right?
  • Wayfarer
    22.2k
    ’I'm not saying that consciousness doesn't exist. I'm just saying it isn't what you think it is."Enai De A Lukal

    Just saying it isn’t what who thinks it is? After all, illusions can only ever be artifacts of a conscious intelligence.
  • Banno
    24.7k
    It's much easier to critique a philosopher if you start by misunderstanding them.

    But garnering four pages in a day. Isn't that a good OP?
  • Enai De A Lukal
    211
    Obviously this is explicitly question-begging.
  • Enai De A Lukal
    211
    Yeah and weren't Devan99's threads about infinity pretty active too? Relative to actually serious/substantive threads? Makes me have a sad face.
  • Eugen
    702
    If it’s OK, could I refer to your comment in it?Kmaca

    SURE!
  • Eugen
    702
    But garnering four pages in a day. Isn't that a good OP?Banno

    My problem with some philosophers and scientists is that they come with a baggage of personal beliefs and sometimes they just reject everything that gets into conflict with their previous beliefs. After all, they are more humans in the classical sense than ''rational beings''.
    I didn't expect to be successful with this question because it is neither philosophical nor scientific, so the success of this thread represents exactly the proof of the human nature comes first :)
  • Eugen
    702
    I think therefore I am begs the question why / how do you think?Pop

    Thank you too!
    I think begging the question means nothing in terms of the obviousness of the fact that we exist and have consciousness. It is the most obvious thing, we are in a direct experience with it and I truly believe that those who argue with that and find all kind of long complicated explanations to make others feel that things are much complicated than they seem to be, are either crazy or they just don't accept things that are in conflict with their previous beliefs.

    By the way, your name sounds Romanian.
  • Eugen
    702
    No problem!
  • Banno
    24.7k
    My problem with some philosophers and scientists is that they come with a baggage of personal beliefs and sometimes they just reject everything that gets into conflict with their previous beliefs.Eugen
    I puzzle at this, since a few of the things you have said have indicated that you might have a theistic bias, and hence a preference for spirits and souls and such.
  • Eugen
    702
    have indicated that you might have a theistic biasBanno

    1. Please show me exactly those things indicating I am a theist.
    2. Even if I were a theist, would that be sufficient to make me being wrong? I see absolutely no relevance, you should bring some arguments for that too.
  • Banno
    24.7k
    Dude, it was just a question.

    Methinks you protest too much.
  • Isaac
    10.3k
    I puzzle at this, since a few of the things you have said have indicated that you might have a theistic bias, and hence a preference for spirits and souls and such.Banno

    I think you're forgetting some key definitions

    Other people's opinions = biases and personal beliefs.

    My opinions = rational, self-evident common sense
  • Eugen
    702
    Dude, it was just a question.Banno

    Ok, I didn't see the ''?''
  • Eugen
    702
    Other people's opinions = biases and personal beliefs.

    My opinions = rational, self-evident common sense
    Isaac

    Finally, a good point )))
  • Banno
    24.7k
    So - you exercising your first amendments rights?
  • Banno
    24.7k
    But that's exactly what I was doing;

    Eugen's opinions = biases and personal beliefs.

    My opinions = rational, self-evident common sense.
  • Eugen
    702
    I think you're forgetting some key definitions

    Other people's opinions = biases and personal beliefs.

    My opinions = rational, self-evident common sense
    Isaac

    My opinion is biased (which, by the way, doesn't automatically makes it invalid) in the sense of beliving that when you are searching for the truth, you should forget about previous beliefs. I see no difference between a guy denying consciousness and those who claim dinosaurs didn't exist but they were planted by the devil to make people believe Earth is older than 7000 years.
  • Eugen
    702
    But that's exactly what I was doing;

    Eugen's opinions = biases and personal beliefs.

    My opinions = rational, self-evident common sense.
    Banno

    I agree. But you also have to agree you're jealous of my success hahaha
  • Banno
    24.7k
    Have you worked out that the folk named on the first page do not actually do what you claimed in your OP?
  • Banno
    24.7k
    you're jealous of my successEugen

    You goata long way to go to reach my record, friend.
  • Eugen
    702
    folk named on the first page do not actually do what you claimed in your OP?Banno

    Who is this folk?
  • Banno
    24.7k
    Oh, sorry. I just assumed you were reading your own thread.

    SO, who is it that claims consciousness does not exist?
  • Eugen
    702
    You goata long way to go to reach my record, friend.Banno

    Nothing can stop me!!!
  • Eugen
    702
    I do, but my memory is short. Could you please tell me who that folk is?
  • Banno
    24.7k
    SO, who is it that claims consciousness does not exist?Banno
  • Isaac
    10.3k
    But that's exactly what I was doing;

    Eugen's opinions = biases and personal beliefs.

    My opinions = rational, self-evident common sense.
    Banno

    No, that's exactly what you were doing in your opinion, which is just a biased personal belief.

    In my opinion, which is self-evident common sense you weren't.

    This is really easy, I can definitely see the attraction. I'm going to start a thread on how Jumbo Jets must be a conspiracy because c'mon, they're obviously too heavy to fly, and no amount of so-called aeronautical engineers biased and personal beliefs are going to persuade me otherwise.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.