> [Arlo begins a new thread] Why start a new thread when its simply a rehash of the old one? Also, why don't you answer my question as to why you are curious?
> Platt had, as is typical, derided the arguments made by Krimel (about > the > origins of consciousness) as "oops". Since Ham has already indicated his > beliefs to be "poof", but has been wholly unable to articulate any answers > to > these simple questions, I thought that Platt, who also advocates a "Great > Poof" > theory should have a go at them. After three posts of evasion (thread was > under > What is SOM?), I thought I pull this into a new thread to, to give Platt > (or > Ham) a more noticeable forum to consider these questions. > > I am also adding to this the question about the evolution of > consciousness. But > first, the thread Platt has (so far) been wholly unable to answer. > Hopefully > his next post to this will be answers to these questions. > > [Arlo had asked] > First, I assume you'd agree that at some point in the far, far distant > past, > some pre-pre-primate of man lacked the sophistication in > consciousness/awareness that "man" possesses. If you disagree here, let me > know. > > If we accept the above premise, then something had to change, some event > or > something that occurred, some change in something, that can account for > the > appearance of something where it did not exist before. No? > > I've been vocal about my view on social participation (an unintended > consequence of neurological evolution) being this "change". Physiologists > may > point to simply the neurobiological changes in themselves that account for > the > appearance of human consciousness. Both of these views you characterize > (slyly) > as "oops". I've argued that these are not "oops" but "aha's!", moments > where > Quality latched onto the unexpected formations that appeared due to > genetic > changes. > > So I ask you, Platt, "what changed?" You disavow both physiological and > sociological theories. I know that. So what do you offer instead? The > only > thing I could glean from Ham's responses is a sort of Divine Intervention, > a > great "Abracadabra!" or "Poof!" where "on high" (Ham's words) suddenly > poofed > consciousness into existence. > > What do you offer instead of these? Although you run from the word, the > only > thing you have ever offered in the past is "Great Poof" a la Ham of some > "Qualigod". Now tell me, if not "oops" or "aha!" or "poof", then what? > > [Arlo adds a new question to Platt] > Is it your opinion, along with Ham, that "consciousness" in man has > evolved > over historic time, from "genus to species" (as Ham said), from the > earliest > primates with this consciousness to modern man? Or did "consciousness" > appear > fully-formed and fully-evolved in those early primates? Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
