On 20 Sep 2013, at 19:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/20/2013 9:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Note also that Truth, by definition cannot be Popperian: it is not
falsifiable, of course. That's a common point with consciousness
"here-and-now", which is not falsifiable nor doubtable, yet true
(except for the zombies of course). OK?
I think that is too quick. First, what Popper meant by falsifiable
was that there be a test of a theory which we can conceive as having
an outcome contrary to its prediction. Of course he knew that if
the theory were correct the outcome couldn't falisify it. The point
was that we could only learn something if we didn't already know the
Of course Popper talk about human presentable or axiomatizable
theories, and truth (even just arithmetical truth) is not such a thing.
Second, that there is a conscious thought may be indubitable WHILE
the thought, "There is a conscious thought." is present.
OK. That is what I meant.
But it doesn't follow that the content of a conscious thought is
Sure, but in this case the content is the presence of a consciousness.
The content might be, "There is a flying pink elephant in my room."
which is both dubitable and almost certainly false. And if the
thought is, "I had a conscious thought." that too is dubitable.
We agree on this. The indubitable thought is not "I was conscious",
but "I am conscious".
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 post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.