And yet incredibly she has spent a career writing and lecturing on consciousness, including a book all about the "hard" problem in which she interviews consciousness researchers worldwide about their research into that very idea and other ways of understanding the mind.
Could it be that she's one step ahead of you? Could it be that this article, which is about the illusion of dualism, has already gone beyond what you are saying? The "illusion" she refers to is the illusion we have that our sense of self is somehow qualitatively different from everything else that is going on in there. ---In [email protected], <authfriend@...> wrote : She needs first to realize she's making a gigantic cognitive error in saying consciousness and the sense of self are an illusion. She can't possibly get anything else right (including TM pure consciousness research) if she doesn't see that the "illusion" idea is self-refuting. Doesn't really have anything to do with TM; it's just an incredibly stupid mistake about the nature of ordinary waking-state consciousness. As I said, she doesn't see any value in the TM Pure Consciousness research so she doesn't take it into account and consider the implications of a state of alertness in the brain without any content to be alert about. L ---In [email protected], <authfriend@...> wrote : Who has the "false idea" of the persisting self? Who is deluded by this illusion? Susan Blackmore has a new essay about consciousness research on her website. Food for thought: "Consciousness is not some weird and wonderful product of some brain processes but not others. Rather, it is an illusion constructed by a clever brain and body in a complex social world. We can speak, think, refer to ourselves as agents and so build up the false idea of a persisting self that has consciousness and free will." http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25457 http://www.edge.org/response-detail/25457
