Eugen

Guys, thank you so much for your answers! Unless wants to add something, I consider this thread closed. Thank you again!

Thank you very much for your answer! In order to be as certain as possible in regard to a thing, I sometimes become very doubtful of my own logic. Whe...

Agree.

1. I'm trying to be as empathic and sincere with you. so PLEASE don't get upset and don't take it personally. You've got two issues: one is psychologi...

I've heard this argument before. It sounded like this: everything is kind of vague. For example, tables are vague. If you remove one leg, would it sti...

I know you didn't and I wasn't offended. Still, it was a crappy move. The problem is that the more I say it, the more I imagine a gay orgy between de ...

It's time to expose some bullshit here. - 1. My question wasn't assuming emergence was true. My question was totally different, but this guy simply ca...

I am not implying anything, I just asked things about a guy's use of a word. I have no idea about Whitehead, what's a non conscious experience or how ...

Excellent answer! But I guess that would be woo in 's view, so he wouldn't take it seriously. It's a non-starter for him.

By the contrary. That was pure crap from your side to quote me with something I never said. I don't care if consciousness is a process or a unicorn an...

I would agree with you if it weren't for...well...Chalmers. He's got a paper on proto-consciousness and for him it is non-experiencial, it's not consc...

You quoted me "consciousness is not a process". Could you please give me more content of that post where I said that?

So you're saying Penrose is actually referring to phenomenal consciousness but he calls it proto-consciousness just because most of people conflate co...

It seems to me he doesn't have logical arguments, but rather he's driven by psychological biases. He's against the idea that consciousness is somehow ...

No, there is The One and there's its manifestation. Two things. It seems you agree with me that The One and the process are different. Agree and I wou...

https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/philosophers/popper/natural_selection_and_the_emergence_of_mind.html It seems to me he didn't avoid e...

And in his view, consciousness is fundamental or it is neither fundamental nor emergent?

Then why don't they just call it consciousness?

So it is inevitable after all in your view.

- so irrelevant. Actually, I can, in principle, agree with that. Still... I personally don't see how this affects emergence.

The two are actually kind of enemies, they had a rough dispute some time ago. I understand the problems of all the theories you mentioned, but that is...

1. I don't care about the definition! Define it as you like. The difference between me and you is that you don't accept that there is a concept of str...

1. I'll read it. Still... the definition is irrelevant to my OP. 2. Define epiphenomenon in your own terms please. 3. - it seems to me you don't under...

Even if it were an activity: 1. Aren't activities ''things"? 2. Do activities exist? 3. If they exist, are they fundamental or emergent? 4. If they ar...

Who says?

1. Can you provide me with reliable sources on that one? Thank you! 2. How come reductive materialism avoids emergence at all? ?Pantagruel You have th...

1. So you've changed your mind. There is no way to avoid emergence. 2. - No, it doesn't. 3. - I don't care what your personal belief is. There is a cl...

Well, reductive entails emergence. Reductive material IS weak emergence. From the fundamental to consciousness = weak emergence; from fundamental to w...

No. My question is not about consciousness, it is about emergence. I am not interested if it's possible for something to exhibit consciousness without...

Well, it would be kinda hard for me to take your false accusation as an argument against weak emergence. Making a strawman looks like you're the one i...

That we are... literally! :lol:

Guys, I need help! Can someone explain to me what wants to say? I am not capable to grasp it. Thank you!

You're very confusing. I guess intentionally. My questions are very clear and it seems to me you're the only one complicating things around here. So.....

I cannot understand you. I'm not reifying anything here in my opinion. 1. Is a physical body/organism/brain necessary for the existence of consciousne...

I am referring to phenomenal consciousness, qualia, "what it is like to be"-ness. I am not referring to self-consciousness.

For me it's important to know if we can avoid emergence (weak or strong) starting from non-consciousness. Panpsychism and idealism start with consciou...

Thank you, man! So just to make things clearer. I am referring to both weak and strong emergence. Weak emergence = consciousness just is a configurati...

1. From what I understand from this interview, Penrose says consciousness is part of the fundamental reality, but it is not the only fundamental part....

I am familiar with your view, and I don't make sense of it. But thanks anyway!

Thank you a lot! By the way, are you familiar with Bach's theory of mind? Is that weak or strong emergence in your opinion?

That's basically strong emergence. Am I wrong?

But is the simulation/consciousness material in Bach's theory or it has different properties than matter?

Thank you! So his metaphysics does not avoid emergence, thus avoiding weak and strong emergence problems, he assumes emergence happens (weak or strong...

Thanks! Looking forward to hearing from you!

So would you be able to avoid emergence (weak or strong) with your fuzzy version?

I sent you a private message.

I'll write you in private on this one.

What's the difference between protoconsciousness and matter?

Thank you for your answers! Please give me more time to reflect. Thanks!

I didn't say functionalism was a subset of anything. And why would you jump straight to functionalism? There are no sides, there's one and the same th...