Terrapin Station

Presumably you wouldn't say that other people exist outside of your concept of rhem, right?

How in the world would you know this?

Again, it's hard to believe that you'd not just be trolling in not being able to disentangle concepts from what the concepts are about or in response ...

There are concepts, but the concepts are not about themselves.

Apparently you are incapable of understanding language usage without thinking that we're necessarily talking about concepts as such. Re the use/mentio...

I'm not saying anything about where it begins or ends or whether it's separated from anything else. Again, I'm not talking about the concept as such.

There's a coin, and it has a location, right? I have to use the word to refer to it on a message board. I'm not talking about the concept, or identify...

That's fine. Nevetheless, I'm not talking about concepts. If I tell you that the cat ran outside when you opened the door, I have to employ concepts, ...

So forget about talking about mind for a moment. Take a coin for example. There's a frame of reference that is the coin itself, and there's a frame of...

You were hinting at concepts. I'm not talking about concepts. I'm not saying something about it being theory-neutral. I'm just saying that I'm not tal...

What? I'm not saying anything about language. What the answer to a question would be is irrelevant.

I just answered this: the perspective of being those states. Everything is different from different perspectives or frames/points of reference. At var...

I'm not saying something about concepts in that. I'm saying that your experience has to be some way or other, has to have some characteristics or othe...

Properties are how something happens to be, characteristics it has, even if that amounts to being indefinite.

Yeah, I'm a physicalist and I was giving my personal explanation there. Not from the perspective of being those states.

Say what? No, particular as in particular. And it has nothing to do with definitions, etc.

I want to focus on this first because I think it's more important: Again, properties don't depend on us, our ideas, etc. Whatever the world is like sa...

I have no idea what you're saying there in context (particularly re "by something which is not reflected in our experience" )

With respect to the object (the objective stuff), it's the fact that it reflects that wavelength of EMR, sure. That's not what it is with respect to o...

Ontologically, isn't inside of/connected to the mother different than outside of/disconnected from the mother?

Try to be less judgmental. Try to not moralize (moralizing being "commenting on issues of right and wrong, typically with an unfounded air of superior...

As far as I can tell it's had no bearing on my mental health. It positively affected my critical thinking/reasoning abilities in general, but I wouldn...

Presumably an important part of consciousness is what things are like experientially to the bearer of the consciousness in question. So if we can't ta...

Yeah, on my view, understanding, and whether something counts as an explanation, are subjective--it depends on whether someone's curiosity, questions/...

It's underscoring a problem with developing a scientific account of mind.

How can there be an "our" if there's no "we"? Yeah, that's a property. In fact, even a homogeneous soup that's indeterminate would be properties. Sinc...

By the way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adyC404_gEk

I'd definitely make a wager on that.

There's no "we," but there's an "our"? Ah, sorry, I was thinking you said homogeneous. So the "lumpiness" is a way it is, no?

But at least we're here, right? How? How? According to you it's a completely uniform sea of property-free stuff. How would it "interact," especially w...

Maybe you're religious after all?

I'm asking you about something with scientific accuracy though. So how do you think we get to creatures that impose structure on anything via their co...

You don't think that there's really a shape of molecules, do you? Or molecules for that matter, shapeless or not.

We're not saying something about whether they're really "separate." But you're saying that they're not really a lump of water, carbon dioxide, etc. ic...

It's not irrelevant to what properties are.

So let's consider something like a comet orbiting the sun. We've got a chunk of rock--water, carbon dioxide, ammonia and methane ices, mixed with dust...

No. It's not anything about perception.

??? Why would that be the only way you can see objects being? How would you even see that?

lol it's not a question about perception. You know, you're yet another person here in the "horrible reading comprehension" crowd.

Why?

Right, it's a property of that object reflect that wavelength of EMR, and it's also a property of your experience per se (which is what qualia are).

So you believe that if no people existed, objects would be in what--some quantum, indeterminate state?

Yes, for maybe the fifth time now, properties are simply ways that things are, characteristics they have. We create abstractions/construct concepts ab...

No. And I'm a physicalist, by the way.

If you bring your own booze to a restaurant, the restaurant doesn't supply the booze (that you bring, at least).

If you're talking about quantity in terms of conceptions of it, sure.

That's fine, and it's perfectly consistent with saying that we don't perceive that great deal of ourselves that we bring to what we perceive.

Again, "perception" has a connotation of taking in information external to us, through our senses. So if valuation is perceived, you're saying that va...

Again, properties are simply ways that things are, characteristics they have. So how could there be anything that isn't some way or other?

And you're seeing properties of it. Again, if anyone is thinking that this is saying that you're seeing types/universals, "property" doesn't imply tha...