>>[Marsha ask:] >> If you are comparing and contrasting Chalmers' ideas against RMP's >> concerning consciousness, what are you using as RMP's ideas; he's >> said very little directly? [Dave] In the context of the ongoing discussion this started with DMB's claim that RMP's position on consciousness was the same as James because RMP points to radical empiricism and pragmatism as the two schools of thought MoQ is an extension of.
I objected to that claim, and this discussion ensued. But at the same time researcher's all around the world are spending a huge amount of time and effort on the nature of "consciousness" and RMP hardly even mentions it. Why "no comment" on something so obviously important? And could leaving something that significant out be a fatal error for the whole system? You seem to care about the MoQ but care nothing about issues that could invalidate it. I find that odd. Kind of like loving a paint for its wonderful color, luster, and buttery feel. Except that each morning you wake up to find its all laying on the floor beneath the canvas, but you still keep using it day after day, because YOU LOVE THAT PAINT! Dave 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/md/archives.html
