> the fact that > intelligent behaviour is third person observable but consciousness is > not. > > Stathis Papaioannou
OK. Let me get this straight. Scientist A stares at something, say X, with consciousness. A sees X. Scientist A posits evidence of X from a third person viewpoint. Scientist A confers with Scientist B. Scientist B then goes and stares at X and agrees. Both of these people use consciousness to come to this conclusion. Explicit Conclusion : "Yep, theres an X!" Yet there's no evidence of consciousness?.... that which literally enabled the entire process? There is an assumption at work.... "SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE" and "CONTENTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS" Are NOT identities. When you 'stare' at anything at all you have evidence of consciousness. It's what gives you the ability to 'stare' in the first place. It's blaring at you from every facet of your being. Without consciousness you would never have had anything to bring to a discussion in the first place. Yes, when you stare at a brain you don't 'see' conciousness.... but holy smoke you have evidence blaring by the act of seeing the brain at all! Cheers Colin Hales --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
