On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 12:01:16PM +1000, Russell Standish wrote:
> The alternative is that consciousness is a continuous property (or at
> least finely divided miltivalued), argued by people like Susan

..and by all of critical care medicine.


http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hs=aXM&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&biw=1172&q=critical+care+level+consciousness&btnG=Search

> Greenfield. This doesn't seem right to me. For one thing, this is not
> how the term is used in everyday language - you are either conscious
> or unconscious. I haven't seen one whisk of evidence that this naive
> folk approach has got it wrong.

You aren't serious, are you? Common sense completely fails most of science.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to