it tells me specifically about myself from within
— Mww
It claims to. By what measure do you assess that it actually does. — Isaac
Most of all, my metaphysical paradigm doesn’t need to juxtaposition disabilities or physical damage in justifications for my normative mental goings-on
— Mww
Again, that it doesn't is not evidence that it doesn't need to. — Isaac
It depends, I suppose, on what it is you want to achieve. If you're just looking for a story that answers "why do I think like that?" then metaphysics is certainly an easier route to find one. — Isaac
The task, it seems, is to model the causes of our thoughts. — Isaac
That I think is a condition of my biology, and to seek its causes, is to necessarily use the very thing already caused. — Mww
I can never ever think to a cause of thinking. — Mww
Better to examine what a thought is, what a thought contains, where it fits in some overall system, rather than its causality. — Mww
Well, this conversation has taken an uncomfortable turn for the pathological. Are you saying that you can't tell the difference (even colloquially) between the expressions "there's a song playing in that room over there" and "I've got this song playing in my head"? — Isaac
You can see it happen here 24/7. The same old tired arguments are being made over and over again on this subject, day after day, month after month, year after year. They think they are arguing but all they do is bang heads. — Olivier5
Thing is, this science of idealism we've just described --Xism -- is physicalism. — Kenosha Kid
The "mind-body problem" is a misnomer. Call it an enigma instead, or a mystery, or simply a question. There are many unresolved questions, like the origin of the universe, what existed before the big bang, how did life happen, and who came first: the chicken or the egg? These are accurately called questions, not problems. Nobody calls abiogenesis a "problem", for good reasons. — Olivier5
it's not implausible to have a song in your head. It happens all the time. — RogueAI
Positing the existence of some mind-independent non-conscious stuff doesn't solve any problems. — RogueAI
No, because the idealist says that the cause of your experiences is a mind(s). Everything you experience is a projection of either a coordinated set of minds or a god-head mind — RogueAI
We are just guessing about abiogenesis too. Some guys think they have the begining of a usable framework. Maybe they do, maybe they don't.Unlike with abiogenesis, the explanation for consciousness at this point is pure guess work. I think it's a unique problem. You think "give it time". Maybe. But we should at least have the broad outlines of an explanation by now. The fact we don't is good evidence there's something deeper to the mystery. — RogueAI
I don’t see how you end up with infinite regress. — khaled
Having a song in your head and actually hearing a song from the other room are different yet similar experiences corresponding to different yet similar brain states. What’s the issue with this? — khaled
It seems highly implausible that you actually have a song playing in your head. — Isaac
What are minds themselves in an idealist system? Are they also projections of a mind? Or are they somehow independent and fundamental? If they are the former, whose mind? God’s? Then in whose mind is God a projection? If he’s not a projection in another’s mind, what is he? If the latter, how do they seem to increase whenever a kid is born?
Sorry for all the questions I just don’t get y’all. And I’ve been trying to. — khaled
The cause of my thought can only be a thought — Mww
never to arrive at the unconditioned cause of any thought. — Mww
That I must use thinking, in order to think to that which causes my thinking, is the epitome of infinite regress. — Mww
No, because the idealist says that the cause of your experiences is a mind(s). — RogueAI
No, it's not implausible to actually have a song playing in your head. I have a song playing in my head right now. Do you think it's implausible? Do you think I'm lying or mistaken? — RogueAI
No, it's not implausible to actually have a song playing in your head. I have a song playing in my head right now. Do you think it's implausible? Do you think I'm lying or mistaken? — RogueAI
but they're not indicative of a category error, which is what you were claiming before. — RogueAI
In dualism, there are two categories: mental stuff and physical stuff, and the dualist claims that one comes from the other. — RogueAI
That would be fine if there was an explanation for it all, but in the absence of any explanation (and the problem has been around a long time), I think there's a prima facie case for a category error. — RogueAI
What are minds themselves in an idealist system? Are they also projections of a mind? — khaled
Question not to me but, yes, mistaken. Very mistaken. In the same way there's no red in your head when you think of the colour red. You have representations of a song, but no actual music is playing. — Kenosha Kid
Yes, if by “song playing in your head” you mean that there are air vibrations that produce a certain sound literally emanating or passing through your head. But this is what you must mean in order to make your point. — khaled
Have you ever had a song stuck in your head? — RogueAI
I can go one better: I have even written an entire song, lyrics, chords, bassline and all, in the space of a cigarette break without making a peep. But there was still no music playing in my head, no sounds, just mental representations of sounds. — Kenosha Kid
But you didn't answer my question: have you ever had a song stuck in your head? — RogueAI
Lame. — RogueAI
I'm talking about a song playing in my head. It has nothing to do with air vibrations — RogueAI
I think the idea that mental states = physical states is contradicted by the simple fact that I can have a song playing in my head while there's no music in my skull — RogueAI
If you are incapable of acknowledging the trivial fact that people have songs in their heads, what more can I say? — RogueAI
What are minds themselves in an idealist system? Are they also projections of a mind? — khaled
In short, it’s a comfortable rendering of something for which no certain knowledge yet repeals. — Mww
Exactly right. I am Everydayman. Makes no difference whether true or not, there seems to be a little tiny world contained in my head, and wherever it directs, I go. — Mww
I can never ever think to a cause of thinking — Mww
Modeling the cause of thought implies making better humans.
Modeling the content of thought implies making a human better. — Mww
Well, this conversation has taken an uncomfortable turn for the pathological. Are you saying that you can't tell the difference (even colloquially) between the expressions "there's a song playing in that room over there" and "I've got this song playing in my head"? — Isaac
No, — RogueAI
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.