Ok, so if 'experience' is the word we're using to describe the post hoc storytelling, then neuroscience has a few quite good models for that. There doesn't seem to be a hard problem there. — Isaac
Why can't all the neuronal stuff happen without me thinking I'm having an experience? — bert1
*more like a family resemblance of neuronal happenings, there's no one-to-one correspondence. — Isaac
Why can't all the neuronal stuff happen without me thinking I'm having an experience? — bert1
The gulf between the purported complex complete picture of something people believe they have in their mind('visual thinkers' and all that) with what they can describe when asked a few questions about it. — creativesoul
None of the computers I know have eyes. Can I conclude that they are definitely not self-aware? — Olivier5
What about people without eyes? — Olivier5
That's why I introduced the distinction between 'phenomena' and 'noumena', and pointing out that there's a fundamental distinction made in philosophy between the sensory and rational faculties, which I understand still exists in Husserl, although I'm not conversant with the details. But your statement basically seems to state that the world is as it appears, on face value, which I'm sure is not what you mean. — Wayfarer
but logic* as a field does not present an argument or a justification of itself.
— SophistiCat
This would be true if logic were, magically, its own interpretative base
— Constance
That's the opposite of what I said. — SophistiCat
What do you think the thesis of physicalism is? I don't think there is a single generally recognized physicalist doctrine. It is more of a family resemblance among philosophical treatments of certain subjects. — SophistiCat
That's hardly even a caricature of physicalism. No one would say that you are "seeing brain states" when you look at something. — SophistiCat
Well, I was hoping to find out more about "this matter" (not so much about phenomenology), but I am making no progress in teasing it out. — SophistiCat
So you have a special definition of consciousness for blind folks. Good for them I guess... — Olivier5
If you tested pupillary response in a fully blind person you'd be doing it wrong. — Isaac
I was thinking of something more radical, like some science-induced telepathy, which would then allow us to feel what it is to be a bat. — Olivier5
I imagine it would start very simply with something like what has been studied with the MRI. — T Clark
I just don't know whether it seems like I'm phenomenally conscious is different than actually being conscious in the hard sense. — Marchesk
Then in what sense are we 'aware' of a yellow disk and a blue disk? We clearly are not experiencing their actual properties. — Isaac
What neural correlates? And how do we know they are the neural correlates? If "by report" then how do we know the camera's circuits aren't 'aware' of the light? — Isaac
You may well be right. — T Clark
So if we want to read people's minds one day, we need a way to listen qualitatively to their music -- the thoughts themselves in whatever materiality they take, be it brainwaves or something else. Not just measure quantitatively the level of effort spent in producing thoughts. — Olivier5
No one would say that you are "seeing brain states" when you look at something. — SophistiCat
Then I am gratified you are here to disabuse me. I won't ask for a thesis, just the essential idea you have in mind. — Constance
I'm not seeing the problem you're seeing here. History is littered with understandings and entities which seemed 'so obvious' to people at the time, but later societies consider them nothing but misunderstandings or superstition. I can't see how "everyone thinks it's obvious" presents any major barrier to neurological theories. — Isaac
Yes, because you've already done it again and again based on a real human body. — Olivier5
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.