-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Nyman
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 7:33 AM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We all (excuse me to use 1st pers form
Colin Hales writes:
the fact that
intelligent behaviour is third person observable but consciousness is
not.
Stathis Papaioannou
OK. Let me get this straight. Scientist A stares at something, say X,
with consciousness. A sees X. Scientist A posits evidence of X from a
third
. It sounds like you have some further,
and more-specific, ideas, which are the real energy source behind your argument.
Best, Ben Udell
- Original Message -
From: Colin Hales [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 11:29 PM
Subject: RE: evidence
Colin Hales wrote:
Most of the time I'm observing something else. When I try to observe
consciouness, I
find I am instead thinking of this or that particular thing, and not
consciousness
itself. Consciousness can only be consciousness *of* something.
Got that?
Brent Meeker
Absolutely.
(a) I know I'm conscious
(b) I know that you are intelligent, unless my senses are tricking me
(c) I assume that you are conscious but I don't know this, even if I can
be sure
my senses are not tricking me, in the same way as I know (a) and (b).
To give another example, we know that many
culture and discipline blindness.
Is seeing visible? What does it look like?
Brent Meeker
Seeing.
Keep trying...you'll 'see it' It'll sink in eventually! It took a long
time for me and I'm nowhere near as bright as all you folks.
Colin Hales
Colin, list,
huge snip
But, past a certain point, going over all these generalities stops
advancing the point and makes me sound fuddy-duddy. It sounds like you
have some further, and more-specific, ideas, which are the real energy
source behind your argument.
Best, Ben Udell
Wow! Can
]
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
Colin, Stathis, Brent,
1. I think we need to distinguish a cybernetic, self-adjusting system like a
sidewinder missile, from an inference-processing, self-_redesigning_ system
like
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
a) The belief in a fictional 'objective view'. This is a view that is
never had by anyone.
I don't think the view metaphior is very helpful.
There are more or less objective beliefs. What is
subjective about 2+2=4 ?
- Original Message -
From: 1Z [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
a) The belief in a fictional 'objective view'. This is a view that is
never
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: 1Z [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Everything List everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
a) The belief in a fictional 'objective view
PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 10:29 PM
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
Colin, Stathis, Brent,
1. I think we need to distinguish a cybernetic, self-adjusting system like a
sidewinder missile, from an inference-processing, self-_redesigning_
the fact that
intelligent behaviour is third person observable but consciousness is
not.
Stathis Papaioannou
OK. Let me get this straight. Scientist A stares at something, say X,
with consciousness. A sees X. Scientist A posits evidence of X from a
third person viewpoint. Scientist A
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
the fact that
intelligent behaviour is third person observable but consciousness is
not.
Stathis Papaioannou
OK. Let me get this straight. Scientist A stares at something, say X,
with consciousness. A sees X. Scientist A posits evidence of X from a
third
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brent Meeker
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 9:49 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
the fact
-
From: Colin Hales [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 9:09 PM
Subject: RE: evidence blindness
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brent Meeker
Sent: Sunday
Dear Benjamin and folks,
Your words capture a whole bunch of valuable stuff. In a project to define a
comprehensive standard for 'scientific method' it would be very useful
input. The particulars involved here, however, are about the basic reality
that all scientific behaviour is grounded in
Colin Hales wrote:
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:everything-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brent Meeker
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 9:49 AM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: evidence blindness
Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote
Most of the time I'm observing something else. When I try to observe
consciouness, I
find I am instead thinking of this or that particular thing, and not
consciousness
itself. Consciousness can only be consciousness *of* something.
Got that?
Brent Meeker
Absolutely. Intrinsic
19 matches
Mail list logo