did your dog communicate to you (in dogese, of course) that she has - NO -
INNER NARRATIVE? or you are just ignorant to perceive such?
(Of course do not expect such at the complexity level of your 11b neurons)
John M

On 11/22/08, Brent Meeker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Günther Greindl wrote:
>> Kory Heath wrote:
>>> If Lucky Alice is conscious and Empty-Headed Alice is not conscious,
>>> then there are partial zombies halfway between them. Like you, I can't
>>> make any sense of these partial zombies. But
>>   also can't make any
> I don't see why partial "zombies" are problematic.  My dog is conscious of
> perceptions, of being an individual, of memories and even dreams, but he
> doesn't
> have an inner narrative - so is he a partial zombie?
> Brent
>> I think a materialist would either have to argue that Lucky Alice is
>> conscious (if he focuses on physical states) and that removing neurons
>> would lead to fading qualia (the "partial zombies") or simply assume
>> that already Lucky Alice is a Zombie (because he focuses on causal
>> dynamics).
>> (I would like to note that I have dropped MAT in the meantime and tend
>> to MECH. Just wanted to "simulate" a materialist argumentation :-) -
>> maybe I can convince myself of MAT and not MECH again *grin*)
>> Could we say that MAT focuses on _physical states_ (exclusively) and
>> MECH on _dynamics_? And that MGA shows that one can't have both?
>> Cheers,
>> Günther
>> >
> >

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to