On Monday, March 24, 2014 5:15:04 PM UTC-4, Gabriel Bodeen wrote: > > He gives six evidences. > > First, he falls for quantum pseudoscience. >
He only says that what has been observed suggests that it is possible that consciousness is fundamental. > Second, he says that he personally failed to make AI when he tried and > incorrectly implies that difficulty means impossibility. > You overlook the possibility that he failed because it does happen to be impossible. You incorrectly imply that difficulty means possibility. > Third, he brings up the hard problem and uses it to make an argument from > ignorance. > That doesn't mean the complete absence of progress on it should be dismissed. > Fourth, he says he doesn't know how to define what he means by > consciousness, and then makes another argument from ignorance. > There is no evidence that suggests that consciousness needs to be defined. What definition do you claim contradicts his argument? > Fifth, he repeats the mistaken Berkeley's Master argument. > Unconvincing. > Sixth, he falls for NDE pseudoscience. > He explicitly states that he does not insist that the evidence is valid, only that there are increasingly high quality studies which contradict the narrow, normative view of consciousness. He is not wrong. > Unconvincing. > Unsubstantiated criticism. Craig > > On Monday, March 24, 2014 3:36:43 PM UTC-5, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >> http://www.novaspivack.com/uncategorized/consciousness-is-not-a-computation-2 >> > -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
