You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Isaac

Comments

Good attempt. But, like @"Joshs", you've given an excellent account of the unexamined preconceptions of scientists. What you've not answered is why we...
July 19, 2022 at 06:01
Then isn't that somewhat trivially tautologous? What is it you draw from this conclusion that you found novel? Again, I'm not clear on what the first ...
July 19, 2022 at 05:44
Interesting, but I don't buy it. You frequently seem to have this dichotomy on how you express these ideas which makes them unconvincing. You'll talk ...
July 19, 2022 at 05:37
I didn't mean to say nothing was going on. My point was your wording, your description of it, was a foreign to me as mine is (perhaps) to you. It's no...
July 19, 2022 at 05:26
If... ... then it seems likely to me that when... ...they merely replace it with another culturally constructed presupposition. To assume otherwise re...
July 18, 2022 at 19:24
You said... In response to... If sll you meant was that yhr boundaries overlap, then I don't see how that forms a criticism. Systems can be defined. T...
July 18, 2022 at 19:19
It's this move that I'm questioning. It seems odd to say that scientists as a group are blinkered by some presupposition (that is nonetheless clear en...
July 18, 2022 at 19:02
Right. As I said https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/720016, but you unfortunately ignored, both your position on inaction and your posi...
July 18, 2022 at 18:17
Indeed. It's an incorrigible habit. I'd have to say neither. See, whilst I find the tenor of your critism on point with regards to cognitive science, ...
July 18, 2022 at 16:59
And how do rules control your behaviour when you do not have to abide by them if you don't want to? Right. So I shouldn't change my current rules, tha...
July 18, 2022 at 16:39
Your source claims that systems are open, not that they have no definition. In fact he claims the exact opposite. Nope, that's not what Bertalanffy cl...
July 18, 2022 at 11:53
Yes. And no, I don't think those words directly refer to some property of experience either. http://www.affective-science.org/pubs/2017/barrett-tce-sc...
July 18, 2022 at 11:40
I'm going to quibble here too, though with far less warrant. Most neuroscientists and cognitive scientists I've worked with (I can think of only one e...
July 18, 2022 at 11:02
I don't see how we 'know' this. Certainly not scientifically. All the data we have scientifically seems to show that experiences cannot be said to hav...
July 18, 2022 at 10:59
No, but, like tetrachromy, it gives us some parameters. Some possibilities are shown to be unlikely given the data we have. One such is the idea that ...
July 18, 2022 at 10:44
How do we know that? How have we updated our model of what's happening in tetrachromats? By following the evidence from neuroscience. By accommodating...
July 18, 2022 at 10:26
Because that's the consequence of what we know about how brains work. Either you're bracketing that out entirely (in which case out goes light hitting...
July 18, 2022 at 10:24
There's that equivocation again though. You can't on the one hand invoke "their eyes and/or brain work differently" and then when I talk about the con...
July 18, 2022 at 10:18
No, but 'that it broke a window' is. And if it breaks every single window it comes into contact with, then 'that it breaks windows' is a property of t...
July 18, 2022 at 09:51
No it doesn't. You seeing white and gold dress and me seeing a black and blue is not remotely random, its in fact completely explicable by direct dete...
July 18, 2022 at 09:34
Yeah, I think we're just going round in circles on this one. If a computer game is scary, then that is a property of the computer game that it scares ...
July 18, 2022 at 09:30
What would be its intrinsic nature. Why would 'it causes me to respond thus' not be one of its intrinsic properties? Surely this question is the exact...
July 18, 2022 at 09:27
I don't see the 'better'. The improvement is what? This seems to equivocate over phenomenological and scientific senses. I can't see why you'd accept ...
July 18, 2022 at 09:21
But it isn't. It's not 'directly' aware if the vibrations in the phenomenological sense of 'aware' (damn terminology problems again). I don't know spi...
July 18, 2022 at 08:19
Yes, plus a range of others. Something like... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilac_chaser ...or the Gorilla experiment I described earlier (not seei...
July 18, 2022 at 08:05
Possibly, but then do you not also experience some of the optical illusions, weird filtering, and changes of perspective that the multi-stage scientif...
July 18, 2022 at 06:50
I have been trying to do so, but clearly with less success than I'd hoped. Is there something specific about my attempts that have failed for you, or ...
July 18, 2022 at 06:44
Possibly. I've never gotten clear how indirect realism is using the term 'indirect' (nor, for that matter how direct realism is using the term 'direct...
July 18, 2022 at 06:24
Yes. 's last post seems to sum it up for me. Perception is a staged process, one iteration to the next, as you say, and there seems to be a feeling am...
July 18, 2022 at 06:02
There is a difference between pointing to potential errors in common sense made by us individuals when we're 'riffing' our own ideas and pointing out ...
July 18, 2022 at 05:58
Then don't read my posts. You replied to me, not the other way round. You don't need to tell me you're not interested in my posts, just don't read the...
July 18, 2022 at 05:34
I cited four papers written collectively by eleven experts in neuroscience, cognitive science and computational systems. I thought I was explaining th...
July 18, 2022 at 05:22
Firstly, how could you possibly know what they meant? Secondly, one is no more 'controlled' by one's own rule than one is governed by it. If you can c...
July 18, 2022 at 05:10
One is not 'governed' if one gets to make up one's own rules. One is simply doing as one pleases.
July 18, 2022 at 04:59
... I've no interest at all in being lectured with a series of random assertions from nobodies off the internet. Provide arguments, cite sources, or a...
July 18, 2022 at 04:57
Yeah...shifting into Zen koan hasn't really clarified in the way you might have hoped.
July 17, 2022 at 21:50
And with English grammar...?
July 17, 2022 at 21:16
Same thing. Key word being 'govern'. Not do as you please.
July 17, 2022 at 21:15
Everyone doing as they please (ultimately) is just not ethics. ethic noun uk /?e??k/ us Social responsibility. a system of accepted rules about behavi...
July 17, 2022 at 20:15
The point is we already disagree, you and I. So we've only two choices. We arbitrate (come to a binding agreement, someone imposes on someone else), o...
July 17, 2022 at 20:02
Well, it's not just time. Remembering something is a completely different brain process to the original inference and introduces several opportunities...
July 17, 2022 at 19:58
God?
July 17, 2022 at 19:53
Because the alternative is that everyone just does whatever they want. Again, if you prefer that system, that's your deal, but it just not what morali...
July 17, 2022 at 19:50
Yes they are. They're making an assumption that all the people who would benefit from the prospective person should suffer. They're deciding on behalf...
July 17, 2022 at 19:45
Why not?
July 17, 2022 at 19:43
So who gets to decide what the rules are?
July 17, 2022 at 19:42
We've just been through this. The rest of the existing community are harmed by the absence. The claim is categorically false.
July 17, 2022 at 19:40
So, each person does exactly what they wish. Doing exactly what you want is not ethics, not by any definition at all. The only alternative is that som...
July 17, 2022 at 18:39
Nonsense. People's own private objectives are not ethics, it's just subjective. If I want a big car it's not ethics to get me one. That's exactly what...
July 17, 2022 at 17:49