A Pragmatist's Guide to God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-04-2017, 11:11 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:06 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  David Chalmers would say that the intentional side of or conscious is computable in binary perhaps, but what about phenomenological qualitative properties like feelings and sensations?

David Chalmers thinks thermostats are conscious.

Hobo

(Just kidding.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thoreauvian's post
15-04-2017, 11:14 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:11 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:06 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  David Chalmers would say that the intentional side of or conscious is computable in binary perhaps, but what about phenomenological qualitative properties like feelings and sensations?

David Chalmers thinks thermostats are conscious.

Hobo

(Just kidding.)

Yes, he has posed the idea that perhaps everything has some fundamental element of consciousness. Whatever that may be he doesn't know. However, I point to the qualitative elements of our consciousness that seem more than operating in binary form.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stephen Pedersen's post
15-04-2017, 11:15 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:11 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:06 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  David Chalmers would say that the intentional side of or conscious is computable in binary perhaps, but what about phenomenological qualitative properties like feelings and sensations?

David Chalmers thinks thermostats are conscious.

Hobo

(Just kidding.)

I swear this guy steve is starting to remind me of a certain Agnostic troll that was banned last month.... And if Steve would bother to look up those threads he'd find the answers he seeks. He seems to have this bizarre notion that these questions haven't been answered (dozens of times on these forums alone).

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes JesseB's post
15-04-2017, 11:16 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:15 AM)JesseB Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:11 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  David Chalmers thinks thermostats are conscious.

Hobo

(Just kidding.)

I swear this guy steve is starting to remind me of a certain Agnostic troll that was banned last month.... And if Steve would bother to look up those threads he'd find the answers he seeks. He seems to have this bizarre notion that these questions haven't been answered (dozens of times on these forums alone).

It doesn't need to look them up. It was the one that posed them in the first place. Weeping

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
15-04-2017, 11:18 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:14 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:11 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  David Chalmers thinks thermostats are conscious.

Hobo

(Just kidding.)

Yes, he has posed the idea that perhaps everything has some fundamental element of consciousness. Whatever that may be he doesn't know. However, I point to the qualitative elements of our consciousness that seem more than operating in binary form.

You don't need more complexity than binary to create a HUGE gradient of possibilities. Pretty much anything can come from a binary logic based system. The first thing you need to do is justify WHY something more complex needs to exist.... Don't just impose extra unnecessary bullshit on reality, at least come up with SOME reason that bullshit is needed before you let it spill out of your mouth....

Also it's possible it's "unknowable"
Also it's likely totally irrelevant in every way.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2017, 11:19 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:16 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:15 AM)JesseB Wrote:  I swear this guy steve is starting to remind me of a certain Agnostic troll that was banned last month.... And if Steve would bother to look up those threads he'd find the answers he seeks. He seems to have this bizarre notion that these questions haven't been answered (dozens of times on these forums alone).

It doesn't need to look them up. It was the one that posed them in the first place. Weeping

A sock account? Perhaps you are right lol

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2017, 11:20 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:15 AM)JesseB Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:11 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  David Chalmers thinks thermostats are conscious.

Hobo

(Just kidding.)

I swear this guy steve is starting to remind me of a certain Agnostic troll that was banned last month.... And if Steve would bother to look up those threads he'd find the answers he seeks. He seems to have this bizarre notion that these questions haven't been answered (dozens of times on these forums alone).
Must we sink to ad hominins? I didn't know you guys have settled all metaphysical disputes and are in agreement on all of these issues. Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-04-2017, 11:20 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:06 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:02 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Ooh, ooh! Pick me! I know this one, miss.

VM Smartass

01001001 01110100 00100111 01110011 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101111 01101110 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01111010 01100101 01110010 01101111 01110011

David Chalmers would say that the intentional side of or conscious is computable in binary perhaps, but what about phenomenological qualitative properties like feelings and sensations?

Chalmers is counting too many layers of turtles.

Yes

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like DLJ's post
15-04-2017, 11:21 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
Fuck off, good sir.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
15-04-2017, 11:22 AM
RE: A Pragmatist's Guide to God
(15-04-2017 11:20 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(15-04-2017 11:06 AM)Stephen Pedersen Wrote:  David Chalmers would say that the intentional side of or conscious is computable in binary perhaps, but what about phenomenological qualitative properties like feelings and sensations?

Chalmers is counting too many layers of turtles.

Yes



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: