--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > Judy what this reminds me of is Maharishi's explanation that > the three deepest levels of individuality are what he calls > Iness, Amness, Isness, the latter being the deepest. I like > the word Isness because IMO it best avoids the connotation of > an object, which so many phrases used in this context are > unable to avoid.
Honestly, Share, I don't think the "hard problem" has much of anything to do with this explanation of Maharishi's. I think you miss what the discussion is about and thoroughly confuse the issue if you try to see it in those very esoteric terms. Again, I'd recommend you have a look at Wikipedia's page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness > ________________________________ > From: authfriend <authfriend@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2013 1:24 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Another Voice in the Argument about Consciousness > > > > Â > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Susan" <wayback71@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <authfriend@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" > > > <anartaxius@> wrote: > > snip > > What the "hard problem" is *about* is something very > simple, very immediate, very transparent--that there is > *something it is like* to be you, to be me, to be Dennett. > You may have to sit with that phrase for awhile before it > makes sense; but once it does, a whole lotta crap just > falls away. >
