Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The regress argument against Cartesian skepticism (2012) [pdf]

individual.utoronto.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–14 of 14 posts

Re: The regress argument against Cartesian skepticism (2012) [pdf]

#11

Post by andrewflnr »

jstanley wrote: post #7
naasking wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you should ask yourself what alcohol and drugs are. A way of inducing an altered state of consciousness, just like sleeping and meditating. This isn't problematic for the "brain in vat" scenario.

If the brain is in a vat, why is it affected by alcohol outside the vat? Sleeping and meditating are both internal to the brain, but alcohol only becomes internal to the brain if it has some physical access to the brain. For the brain in a vat theory to work, the computer controlling the simulation would have to monitor the amount of alcohol that is in the bloodstream of the simulated being, and adjust the alcohol in…

Alcohol is part of the simulation. Don't get hung up on the biologically human brain in a physical vat scenario. That's only a tiny slice of what's being discussed.

Re: The regress argument against Cartesian skepticism (2012) [pdf]

#13

Post by Quekid5 »

Strilanc wrote: post #10
somethingroma wrote: post #2

"Does the external world exist, as it so concretely seems?" I know this is not the direction of the paper (or question) but physics already gives us an astounding 'No!'.

Only if you subscribe to some pretty tortured interpretations of quantum mechanics. QM still describes an objective state of the external world, and exactly how it changes over time.

I don't think that's what the poster meant. I think it was probably more along the lines of how you experience e.g. 'light' vs. what it actually is:

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjHJ7FmV0M4
(The vast majority of light is effectively invisible to you.)

Re: The regress argument against Cartesian skepticism (2012) [pdf]

#14

Post by chongli »

somethingroma wrote: post #8
jstanley wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the brain is in a vat, why is it affected by alcohol outside the vat? Sleeping and meditating are both internal to the brain, but alcohol only becomes internal to the brain if it has some physical access to the brain. For the brain in a vat theory to work, the computer controlling the simulation would have to monitor the amount of alcohol that is in the bloodstream of the simulated being, and adjust the alcohol in…

I'm confused. IF a consciousness was housed in a black box (a brain, but we're ignoring it's internals) AND that black box had inputs connected to a computer that can send signals to the black box that it WOULD interpret as signals of sight, sound, touch, hunger, intoxication, etc. THEN how is one suppose to conclude that they are not just a consciousness in a box because they 'feel' drunk after they 'feel' they've i…

I think your confusion arises from the fact that this discussion is about two different thought experiments: the brain in a vat [1] (a la The Matrix) and proper solipsism (which implies no real world at all, not even a vat). [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_in_a_vat

Post reply on HN