Eugen

The topic is not about finding a solution for consciousness. The topic is different. Can something (anything you could think of): 1. be neither fundam...

But it seems to me that you're making my model even more powerful. Not only I don't miss anything, but my model has an extra thing that we could disca...

PS: I'm non-native, so I might type the wrong words sometimes.

- My bad, so don't worry! He may have the knowledge, I'm skeptical about his skills though. But I'm still waiting...

I'm not sure he challenges me. It might be the case he spams me. Not sure yet. I'm not sure I'm a novice to 180Proof, and I do understand your answers...

Don't put the sign ''=" between you and when it comes to me. I totally understand you, I just don't agree with you. With it's a totally different scen...

I'm non-native, so give me an alternative word or notion. - Water is not fundamental. - Water can be 100% reduced to the fundamental properties of rea...

- I'm not surprised, you always find my OP's non-sensical even though you always find answers. - Let me ask you this in a different way. Forget about ...

Ohh... it's not about making a difference in the way I live more than having a clear image in regard to something. I agree the world won't change even...

- Hmmm, the way I phrased it... yes. But to me, in idealism, consciousness is fundamental, period. Indeed, I guess I wasn't very coherent. Yes, there ...

By reasoning, obtaining empirical evidence, etc. But this is not relevant to me. To me, it is relevant if we could find something outside this model. ...

I was totally clear on that: if you don't agree with my notion of ''emergence", ignore it and focus on ''reduction". It's not about its explanatory po...

I didn't try to explain anything. I think you got me wrong. I'm not trying to explain consciousness. You know what? Replace the word consciousness wit...

Elaborate please

Yes. Actually, the other guys were suggesting the same thing. When he's talking about consciousness, it is more in a sort of a political context. To b...

Rather made me understand that there isn't much to understand. He hints at ''strong emergence", maybe even consciousness being fundamental in a way. I...

Guys, I truly appreciate your passion for Zizek, but this OP has a clear topic with clear questions.

- hahahaha 1-0 for you - actually, I find pretty good and with potential to help me on this matter. But for some reason, he sees me as a materialist t...

Bro, are you going to ignore all my questions? :lol:

Ok... so you're basically saying that the fundamental-emergent framework can be replaced by another system of reference, by eliminating the ''fundamen...

So Joscha Bach's computationalist theory of mind would be wrong in your opinion, right?

- Agree. In strong emergence, that is exactly what happens. - So there is an ultimate fundamental reality from which everything else emerges. The diff...

Or to be more specific: what is the difference between not being 100% reducible and being strongly emergent?

But if something is not 100% reducible to the fundamental reality, it is strongly emergent. Later, it seems to me you're denying strong emergence as w...

Thank you for your complex answer! But that's exactly my problem: I'm not equipped to understand such a complex thing you wrote. This is why I keep it...

Reality, existence, consciousness, and many other things have no clear definition or "technical notions". Still...

At this moment, people have already expressed their opinion in unanimity. So even if your opinion were different, it wouldn't matter without a very lo...

You too, man. Nothing personal here, just that I am looking for a very specific answer. Maybe we'll get to debate your interesting view on other OPs. ...

Thank you!

Dude, I don't bother reading your messages :lol:

From my perspective, this OP is closed. I don't have a clear view on what Penrose and Hameroff mean when they mention proto-consciousness. Thank you f...

Even if your discussion is civilised, it is not relevant to the topic. You're here to make propaganda. I have nothing against you personally, but you'...

Blah blah blah... I don't even bother reading the rest. This OP has a clear formulated question. Answer it or leave the OP. I'm not interested in your...

Ok, you're totally right. Everything you say is right. I won't answer you any questions. You gave me your answer. Now you're invited to leave this OP....

Guys, I admire your passion for debate, I really do. But the topic of this OP is different. If one of you has heard or seen Penrose or Hameroff defini...

Mark Solms is a Spinozist. He even said he believes reality is mind. And I don't want to debate further on this. Please save your criticizms for other...

I admire your intention to make things better, but they aren't related to my inquiry. Thanks for your understanding and for your answer! PS: Mark hims...

Thanks

Obviously, we don't determine. We just assume. But this is irrelevand. Ok, let me simplify this again. 1. This question doesn't assume and doesn't wan...

I don't think they've got agendas. I think their brains simply look for alternatives, it's natural. Maybe they're right and we're wrong. Maybe we're b...

Consciousness = subjective experience, i.e. the way it is like to be something. I totally don't understand this question.

The problem is that you assume that my question assumes something. It doesn't. My question is very direct, and simple. The terms I defined are simple....

Weak emergence example: water emerges from H and O; it is emergent, but still matter Strong emergence: starting with matter, ending with a new substan...

Stop hoping! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: You guys spent tons of virtual paint only to argue if that's philosophy or science? Judging by the quantity, I th...

In principle, I cannot disagree with your answer, i.e. Penrose is actually referring to matter. Thank you!

Why don't he call it matter?

You must suffer from some kind of masochism. Otherwise, I can't explain why you're torturing yourself trying to refute non-arguments presented by pers...

I know the interview. Towards the end he makes it pretty clear.

Thank you for your answer! There has been some term confusion here. I mentioned two types of emergence: weak and strong. Weak emergence does NOT imply...

Thank you for answering! Because it is not related to the topic directly, I will answer you in private.