It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
1–10 of 822 posts
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#2[deleted]
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#3Utterly asinine article that doesn't understand its own subject matter.
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#4This is hard to take seriously, the argument this article makes against the hard problem is… that it’s not hard? There is very little in the way of argument here at all, actually; it’s simply a refutation that there is any division between biological function and subjective experience, with no evidence or novel perspective to provide it any weight.
Ironically, I think this article serves as quite a strong defense of the hard problem, because it shows how hard it is to articulate or construct an argument against it at all.
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#5Utterly asinine article that doesn't understand its own subject matter.
Agreed.
> Then he declared that there is another distinct problem — why the brain’s behavior is accompanied by experience at all — which he christened the “hard” problem of consciousness.
This is what the article is positioned against.
> We have souls. We have an inner self. We can treat ourselves as transcendental subjects in the Kantian sense.
Isn't this an equivalent declaration? I understand the desire to cling to such ideas (as the article itself propounds), but if you don't understand the underlying laws to a high enough degree I consider this equivalent to ancient Greeks sitting around saying "there is a double of our soul inside the mirror, WE HAVE SEEN IT". We know today there is absolutely nothing at all "inside" that mirror. How do we know all this qualia isn't just some sort of illusion, that we ACTUALLY experience something?
Unfortunately, this article puts forth an intriguing promise and then completely fails to deliver.
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#6Any argument that a "soul" exists or that consciousness does not arise from the physical world (eg our neurons) is literally unfalsifiable. It cannot be disproven in the same way you can't disprove the existence of God, and so arguing with people that believe in it is largely pointless.
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#7I don’t think consciousness exists, at least not in the way people talk about it. First, there’s no clear definition that everyone agrees on. Second, there’s no way to test whether something has it. Does a cow have it? A dog? A spider? If you can't test for it and even define it, how can you claim its real?
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#8Utterly asinine article that doesn't understand its own subject matter.
Agreed. > Then he declared that there is another distinct problem — why the brain’s behavior is accompanied by experience at all — which he christened the “hard” problem of consciousness. This is what the article is positioned against. > We have souls. We have an inner self. We can treat ourselves as transcendental subjects in the Kantian sense. Isn't this an equivalent declaration? I understand the desire to cling t…
> How do we know all this qualia isn't just some sort of illusion, that we ACTUALLY experience something?
I know what it means to have an experience that is illusory. For example, a mirage, or a drug-induced hallucination.
What doesn’t make sense to me is how it’s possible for it to be an illusion that anything is being experienced at all. An illusion is a type of experience, isn’t it? If the experience is illusory, then who/what is being deceived?
(This is basically just Descartes “I think therefore I am”)
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#9How exciting to see new writing from Carlos Rovelli! He's one of the few physicists and philosophers of science (ancient or modern) who steadfastly rejects a priori assumptions that rely on things other than our observations.
He also echos the modern belief that observer and actor are two sides of the same quantum event.
I highly recommend any and all of his books.
Re: It is time to give up the dualism introduced by the debate on consciousness
#10Philosophers being philosophers and not advancing the discussion at all.