On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:35 PM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2/10/2015 5:29 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 5 February 2015 at 09:19, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 2/4/2015 11:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> On 03 Feb 2015, at 20:13, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> I agree with John. If consciousness had no third-person observable >> effects, it would be an epiphenomenon. And then there is no way to explain >> why we're even having this discussion about consciousness. >> >> >> So we all agree on this. >> >> >> ?? Why aren't first person observable effects enough to discuss? >> > > I guess because if there are no third-person observable effects of > consciousness, then I can't detect any other conscious entities to discuss > the effects with... > > > The epiphenomenon model says there are third-person observable effects of > the phenomenon, which suffice for detecting other entities. Whether the > other entities are really conscious or just faking it is a matter of > inference. > Did you mean to say "The epiphenomenon model says there are *no* third-person observable effects of the phenomenon" ? Jason -- 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.
