Brent wrote (I wish I knew "TO" whom):
"Why not? It acts on the temperature."
Acts? remember my proposed definition for Ccness:
"Response to relations" (like: temperature).
We are deeply in a semantic fit.
I don't think you wanted to argue with me - just clarifying.
JM
On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:49 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 5/27/2013 6:55 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 05:44:57PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
>>
>>> On 5/27/2013 5:08 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 04:53:56PM -0700, meekerdb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think consciousness is an all-or-nothing property. You have
>>>>> to ask "Consciousness of what?" There's consciousness of
>>>>> surroundings: sound, photons, temperature, chemical
>>>>> concentrations.... There's consciousness of internal states.
>>>>> Consciousness of sex. Consciousness of one's location.
>>>>> Consciousness of one's status in a tribe. I think human-like
>>>>> consciousness requires language of some kind.
>>>>>
>>>>> Brent
>>>>>
>>>> I would be happy with consciousness of surroundings. It seems to be
>>>> the most basic of all the ones you mention there.
>>>>
>>> It is pretty basic, but I'd say consciousness of some internal
>>> states is more basic and occurred early in the evolution of life.
>>> Even a cell must know when to divide.
>>>
>>> Why does that require consciousness? I'm not conscious of my body
>> repairing itself, or dogesting food.
>>
>> But that's a large class and is not all-or-nothing either. We're
>>> conscious of light and it's phase relations which form images, but
>>> we don't see the polarization. And we don't see very much of the
>>> spectrum. We don't detect magnetic fields and our detection of
>>> chemicals in the air is almost non-existent compared to dogs.
>>>
>>> You appear to be confusing sensory capability with consciousness. A
>> thermostat is capable of sensing temperature, but I doubt it is
>> conscious of the temperature.
>>
>
> Why not? It acts on the temperature.
>
>
>
>> Consciousness is an experiential quality. We are either conscious when
>> we experience something (called qualia), or we're not conscious at all.
>>
>
> That seems to me just substituting one word "experience" for another
> "conscious" and doesn't tell us anything. The thermostat experiences
> temperature.
>
>
>
>> Still seems all or nothing to me. People who claim consciousness comes
>> in different types, or comes in shades of grey, seem to be talking
>> about completely different things than the usual meaning of the term.
>>
>
> I think the usual meaning refers to humans inner narration (which depends
> on language) and the association of values to that narration. What do you
> think "the usual meaning" is?
>
> Brent
>
>
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to
> everything-list+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<everything-list%[email protected]>
> .
> To post to this group, send email to
> everything-list@googlegroups.**com<[email protected]>
> .
> Visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/**group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en>
> .
> For more options, visit
> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
> .
>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
