You can't argue with a zombie (1995)

Post by DiggyJohnson » Fri, Jun 24, 2022, 6:45 PM UTC

JetAlone wrote: post #23

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #13

Sometimes I wonder if the core problem of this disagreement depends on the certainty of our understanding of information - how it works and scales. This isn’t a strong rebuttal to this paper, though I read it closely, enjoy both sides of the mind-body problem, and do my best to seek some sort of external truth in the matter… But I’m inclined to disagree with Jaron on the following point: What if the contents of the m…

I don't think we can scientifically solve the mind-body problem either. Scientifically, we've been able to pile up some evidence against the brain being remote-controlled through an extremely simple, uni-faceted direct channel of instructions. We're also able to demonstrate that the physical has a profound effect on the mental, which anyone with a source of drugs could have told us millennia ago. Speaking of, I'll ta…

Thanks for the reply! And yes - if you end up within 100 miles of Charleston, SC, I quite seriously will oblige.

Thank you for your comment. I haven't engaged much with "3rd substance and panpsychism" much, so that'll be on my procrastinating reading list this week. I'm writing a book about Why We Play certain games, and I'm always tempted by the rabbit hole that is M-B problem.

Maybe thinking about the M-B is one of the things that distinguishes Man?

Thanks for wading through, I'd have bet dollars to donuts I wouldn't get a response. Cheers :)

Post by lmm » Sun, Jun 26, 2022, 9:58 PM UTC

motohagiography wrote: post #29

lmm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's any less rigour or competence here than in "respectable" philosophy; quite the opposite. There is no excess of metaphor, just an exploration of a technical subject in the terminology that it requires. It's using plenty of jargon and references, sure, but programmers are in no position to throw stones about such things; the jargon is meaningful and clearly defined (indeed, defined clearly at the…

This is an interesting point, as there is a cognitive style among some programmers (but both STEM and critical people) who don't seem to have internal distinctions between a heuristic, a metonym, a functional synecdoche, a coherent abstraction, a generalization, a codeword, a black box, and a joke reference. Few people are really dumb, but when we're designing, writing and teaching, it's important to keep track of wh…

If there's no relevant distinction then why make one? (Indeed, the ability to abstract over irrelevant details is the essence of intelligence). As far as I can see the piece uses "zombie" and "zagnet" entirely legitimately. It does wander, but that's not a crime.

Re: You can't argue with a zombie (1995)

Re: You can't argue with a zombie (1995)