[Willblake2] I may be real dense, but your answer does not seem to answer my question. When you speak of "your physiology" what is the "your". What makes it personally mine, or personally yours? I can understand a system approach to consciousness, but not to the personal sense of being.
Perhaps I am stuck in a question that doesn't exist or that I am expecting a different sort of answer for that doesn't exist. [Krimel] Is what you are asking actually any different from Chalmer's "hard problem"? There has been a great deal of discussion about this; books written, conferences held. I don't know that there is a definite or even a persuasive answer to it. But I think the most productive areas of inquiry are to be found in the neurosciences. As I told Ham recently we have had nearly 4,500 years of inconclusive speculation and introspection that have led to zip. Why continue trying to revert back to methods and patterns of thought that have produced diddly. Just a side note here: when I used the number 4,500 years I was referring back to the Egyptian idea of Ka, a form of SOM that predates the Greeks by about 2,000 years. But yeah its a difficult problem with no clear resolution in sight. There aren't even good guidelines for judging alternative views. So much so, that in spite of the intellectual rigor applied to the problem ones gets the feeling that commitment to one position or another is as much a matter of faith or preference as anything else. 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/
