On 5 February 2014 06:36, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/4/2014 12:20 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > But I don't believe that. I think that consciousness is a necessary > aspect of intelligence, > > OK. > and that is functionally observable. > > It is not. Leibniz already understood this. You evacuate the mind-body > problem. No 3p observation can detect consciousness. It is pure 1p. We can > detect evidences that some entities behave as if they were conscious, but > materialists would not been tempted to eliminate it if it was observable. > > "That" refers to intelligence. Which I think is observable. I think my > dogs are conscious because of their intelligent behavior. > > Well, intelligent behaviour is observable, certainly, but if one is going to draw fine distinctions (coordinate systems not appearing in special relativity, for example) then I think you have to make the cut here and say that behaviour doesn't prove consciousness. Your dogs *could* be p-zombies, or Deep Blue *could* be 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
