> Le Dimanche 26 Novembre 2006 22:54, Colin Geoffrey Hales a écrit :
> <SNIP>
>> What point is there in bothering with it. The philosophical zombie is
>> ASSUMED to be equivalent! This is failure before you even start! It's
>> wrong and it's proven wrong because there is a conclusively logically
>> and
>> empirically provable function that the zombie cannot possibly do without
>> phenomenality: SCIENCE. The philosophical zombie would have to know
>> everything a-priori, which makes science meaningless. There is no
>> novelty
>> to a philosophical zombie. It would have to anticipate all forms of
>> randomness or chaotic behaviour.... NUTS.
> But that's exactly what all the arguments is about !! Either identical
> functionnal behavior entails consciousness either there is some magical
> property needed plus  identical functionnal behavior to entails
> consciousness.
>> This is failure before you even start!
> But the point is to assume this "nonsense" to take a "conclusion", to see
> where it leads. Why imagine a "possible" zombie which is functionnally
> identical if there weren't any dualistic view in the first place ! Only in
> dualistic framework it is possible to imagine a functionnally equivalent
> to
> human yet lacking consciousness, the other way is that functionnally
> equivalence *requires* consciousness (you can't have functionnally
> equivalence without consciousness).
>> This is failure before you even start!
> That's what you're doing... you haven't prove that zombie can't do science
> because the "zombie" point is not on what they can do or not, it is the
> fact
> that either acting like we act (human way) entails necessarily to have
> consciousness or it does not (meaning that there exists an extra property
> beyond behavior, an extra thing undetectable from
> seeing/living/speaking/...
> with the "zombie" that gives rise to consciousness)L.
> You haven't prove that zombie can't do science because you tells it at the
> starting of the argument. The argument should be weither or not it is
> possible to have a *complete* *functionnal* (human) replica yet lacking
> consciousness.
> Quentin

Scientist_A does science.

Scientist_A closes his eyes and finds the ability to do science radically

Continue the process and you eliminate all scientific behaviour.

The failure of scientific behaviour correlates perfectly with the lack of
phenomenal cosnciousness.

Empirical fact:

"Human scientists have phenomenal consciousness"

"Phenomenal consciousness is the source of all our scientific evidence"


"Phenomenal consciousness exists and is sufficient and necessary for human
scientific behaviour"

No need to mention zombies, sorry I ever did.
No more times round the loop, thanks.

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 

Reply via email to