On 17 October 2014 09:38, David Nyman <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16 October 2014 19:54, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think it's a matter of semantics. I'm sure Graziano experiences what I >> experience, given my use of the word "experience", but due to his >> understanding of what underpins this experience he chooses to say it doesn't >> really exist. It's as if someone chose to say life does not really exist on >> the grounds that it's all just chemistry. > > > That doesn't strike me as a good example. I presume both you and he would > agree that there's simply no need to posit "something" (elan vital?) over > and above its physical basis in order to have a satisfactory intuition about > what is meant by life. There's nothing obviously counter-intuitive about the > idea that life demands no explanation beyond the particular physical > processes that constitute living systems. On the other hand I presume you > don't find the parallel intuition - that consciousness demands no > explanation beyond its correlation with specific physical processes - > similarly satisfactory. Am I wrong?
Whether I find it satisfactory or not is a different question. The point I was making is that people who find it satisfactory express this belief idea by claiming that consciousness does not exist. -- Stathis Papaioannou -- Stathis Papaioannou -- 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/d/optout.
