The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
the mind is an illusion in the brian you're not actually conscious
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:10 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman it just seems like youre conscious which is NOT the only requirement for consciousness oh shit (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756518) |
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:11 PM Author: Aqua orchestra pit wow fooled me (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756524) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:13 PM Author: impertinent pistol I have a more nuanced understanding of consciousness than you.
For starters, keep in mind that it is a very flabby word, meaning different things to different people. brain docs have one meaning; there is another meaning under the common cognomen; and there are philosophical meanings.
|
 |
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:14 PM Author: adventurous mischievous famous landscape painting Behold, the Flame. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756555) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:15 PM Author: impertinent pistol not really. Read more. K'thanks. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756560) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:16 PM Author: grizzly hairraiser jap cuckold (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756572) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:15 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman you can say that, but suggesting that there is more than one definition of consciousness by profession misses the point - we're talking about the technical philosophical notion of phenomenal consciousness, not awake vs. asleep (neurologist), or conscious vs. subconscious (psychologist), etc., which generally has a straightforward meaning. if you want to cite dennett's revisionist account of consciousness and make an argument from different premises, feel free to do so, im all ears. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756564) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:19 PM Author: impertinent pistol Yeah, I'm not doing any of that. Pearls before swine. If you study the most recent AI development along with neurology you get the point. But you wont. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:19 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman This is really pretty rude and disrespectful man (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756606) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:20 PM Author: impertinent pistol What boart do you think you are on? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756611) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:20 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman i dunno im pretty sure we're almost all friends here (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756615) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:19 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman you've suggested elsewhere that dennett includes in his definition of consciousness the physiological response of nerve fibers, for example. I have no problem going down that line, but that doesn't go very far in convincing me that the stimulation of those nerve fibers isn't also associated with a categorically different phenomenal mental experience. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756601) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:22 PM Author: impertinent pistol you aren't open to the data. your "theological beliefs" put a mental block and constraint on what you are able to understand. That and your jejune reasoning. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756627) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:26 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman My position is that it is in principle impossible to create a phenomenological illusion out of non-phenomenal matter. I.e. whatever allows us to see and hear and touch is something fundamental to the structure of reality, and not derived from a fundamentally physical and only physical structure. What data should I consider that would contradict this? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756652) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:29 PM Author: impertinent pistol your position needs massive editing for starters. Say what you mean as precisely as you can. No weasel words. Provide an illustration or example. NO WEASEL WORDS. if any words are hedge words, take them out. if any words aren't doing any work, take them out. Instead of using jargon, use examples that illustrate what you think the jargon means. Try again and I'll have a look. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:31 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman I'm not sure it's appropriate to give me directives on how to communicate my beliefs. If you'd be more specific I'd be happy to use language that you're more familiar with. However the language I use above is strictly philosophical (not at all theological) and is generally the preferred neutral way of talking about these questions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756679) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:22 PM Author: impertinent pistol As for whether its appropriate for me to tell you to clean up your writing on this, it is. You keep trying to "show me your smart" by using jargon--like a college student does--but the way to show me you are "smart" or have considered the matter is to write in a clear and lapidary manner.
As for Jargon usage: Yes, if used correctly. however what I didn't say in my original poast was that you are not using the jargon correctly, among other problems. Your misuse of Jargon is only one preliminary problem you have.
But we've had this conversation before. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:24 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman I find it unlikely that I'm misusing the jargon. Please point out which terms I'm using improperly. I do after all have a degree in philosophy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757363) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:28 PM Author: impertinent pistol if you don't think you are misusing the jargon, try to say what you want to say addressing the other points ive made, other than your typically undergraduate misuse of field-specific jargon. no weasel words, no extra verbiage, and provide examples.
Here is a problem: You say the following:
"whatever allows us to see and hear and touch is something fundamental to the structure of reality, and not derived from a fundamentally physical and only physical structure."
So, that would be eyes, ears, and sense of touch? They are "fundamental to the structure of reality"? my eyes are fundamental to the structure of reality? Really? That cant be what you mean. … etc etc.
Also, whats with the use of "it is in principle impossible" --don't say that shit. Just say "it is impossible"
I really am not going to spend more time on this teaching you how to write--and thereby think. ok. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:33 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman again, if you are conversant in the philosophical discussion surrounding the mind body problem you wouldn't think straightforward and commonplace terms like "phenomenal" or "structure" were "weasel words".
if you want me to explain more just ask, but it doesnt seem right for you to suggest that my explanation has some inherent deficiency just because you don't understand the terminology. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:35 PM Author: impertinent pistol Where do I say "phenomenal" or "structure" were "weasel words"? Please don't straw man me if you want to call yourself a philosopher.
friend, I understand the jargon. I don't think you have an adequate control on it, and are misusing it.
What would be MORE interesting to me, and one point which will likely go over your head--much of the jargon you are (mis)using makes divisions and has assumptions built in that will improperly draw you to incorrect conclusions, in light of advances made in what we know about how the human brain works. again, this is probably above your head.
I have some sympathy for you. I got a degree in the liberal arts and it was a painful process afterwards learning how to write again, as I actually went backwards in clarity of thought and expression during my time as an undergrad. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:40 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman oh please, reveal to me your nuanced understanding of the divisions and assumptions that I would fail to understand. lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757446) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:44 PM Author: impertinent pistol No. Again, pearls before swine. this discussion up to this point illustrates as much. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757469) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:47 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman so just to be clear, you have the secret but you can't share it? no offense or anything here man, but you spend a lot of time criticizing the way I communicate my beliefs but when push comes to shove you're too embarrassed to try to communicate yours? come on man (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757487) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:48 PM Author: impertinent pistol TBF I don't just criticize the way you articulate your "beliefs" --I criticize your beliefs as well. Let's not say your beliefs are valid somehow because they aren't. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757496) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:49 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman if i had to assign percentages to those criticisms, i would say 85% form of communication and maybe 15% belief itself. notice that 0% is apportioned to where you articulate your positive/affirmative beliefs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757508) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:52 PM Author: Shivering coral locus athletic conference (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757522) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:52 PM Author: impertinent pistol im shrugging.
You have to show you are worthy to have a discussion with first. in yr poasts, not just here but elsewhere, I don't see any struggle to think clearly, although I do see a misguided effort to show off what you think is smart. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:53 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman this is really weird man. i don't know why i would have to prove myself to someone like that. we're just talking about philosophy and having fun? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757528) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:56 PM Author: impertinent pistol well, we aren't talking about philosophy though. LEt's do that first, and then we can have some fun. go ahead--try to crack the nut. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757541) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:57 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman when you say "talking about philosophy" do you mean discuss the conditions under which we might have a discussion about philosophical issues or do you actually want to talk about a philosophical issue itself? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757555) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:01 PM Author: impertinent pistol you've not demonstrated the capacity to engage in a philosophical issue in all sincerity. Sorry!
Do what I first told you to do with your writing above, and maybe we can talk again. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:02 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman this is really weird behavior man, take it easy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757587) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:04 PM Author: impertinent pistol Not really. I just will require you to be CLEAR in your thought before you start down a warped and misbegotten road that erroneously leads to an eternal soul. I'm tired of that conversation. the whole world is tired of that conversation. facts on the ground are tired of that conversation! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757604) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:39 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman You're not reading my response with much charity, of course I don't think "eyes are fundamental to the structure of reality." We're talking about phenomenal consciousness.
Do you not know the difference between impossible as a matter of contingency and impossible as a matter of principle? That's not a matter of style, that's a substantive difference.
Thanks for gracing me with your intellect lmao |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:43 PM Author: impertinent pistol why do you feel the need to show off the distinction between the different types of impossibility, inasmuch as it makes no difference for purposes of your point whether it is impossible as a matter of principle or simply "impossible".
I know precisely what you mean and the use of the word "in principle" is utterly unnecessary to what you mean to say. Why say it then? Be clear. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:45 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman maybe you should just go talk to someone else then bro (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757474) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:47 PM Author: impertinent pistol Dude, you are the one who poasted that u were going to lunch, and then told me you were back from lunch and wanted to talk more.
Also, ive been clear from the beginning that this is over your head at present. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:48 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman yeah but i've been trying to be patient and not criticize you when what you've done a lot itt is criticize me.
and really please stop with this "im too smart for you" stuff. it's totally vacuous. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:57 PM Author: impertinent pistol Okay. And this here is precisely why there are gradations of intellect in the educational system. Some people can, and most people cant. At least for now, you are in the position of "cant".
I think the shotgun blast to your face has been strong enough to get you to stop pestering me with your misapplication of philosophical thought for a while.
But you'll probably be back. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:58 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman my lsat was higher than yours (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757569) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:02 PM Author: impertinent pistol Who knows. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757593) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:50 PM Author: laughsome dead range deer antler dude it's not over his head, you are literally saying nothing in the way of argument (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757510) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:54 PM Author: impertinent pistol he has not presented anything for me to push against.
You have to have basic skills to come to the table. those basic skills include being able to communicate what you mean as clearly as possible.
Maybe he CAN do so if he spent a couple hours redrafting and working on what he wants to say with my criticisms in mind. but the boart isn't really well set up for that, nor do I suspect is OP able to actually do so at present. After all, he has a degree in philosophy:) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:00 PM Author: laughsome dead range deer antler dude you're not saying anything and have zero standing to judge anyone's communication skills. lol he takes up your point about "consciousness" being a slippery word, and you don't bother to pick up the dialectic and just say he doesn't get it. so say you're not just a condescending asshole who's dumber than he thinks he is and he really is far away from the profound argument you're making. how does he get it without you explaining it to him? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757578) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:06 PM Author: impertinent pistol maybe im condescending here. but it doesn't change what I poasted.
If I were your teacher in real life I would do everything I could not to be condescending. but this is a boart, and there's no intellectual openness available because im not standing in front of you as your teacher and your not paying tuition and sitting in front of me as my student. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:12 PM Author: laughsome dead range deer antler lmao.
anyway setting intellect aside, you should know your writing itself is terrible. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:19 PM Author: impertinent pistol on boart, no doubt, no doubt.
But without effort, everyone's is.
Think about how awesome it is when some xo bro poasts some awesome story or something that reads like a book. And how rare! |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:19 PM Author: cerebral property Who's The Brian? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756607) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 2:53 PM Author: Alcoholic irradiated french chef (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757526) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 12:36 PM Author: laughsome dead range deer antler (daniel dennett) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36756707) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:13 PM Author: Buck-toothed Gay Step-uncle's House Hairy Legs i don't think this is an accurate description of illusionism. consciousness exists according to llusionism, but qualia don't. our experience is the result of mental representations computed by the brain, but these mental representations don't have phenomenal properties that can't be accounted for by a materialist description of mental activity. representationalist theories of the mind fit in nicely with our current understanding of how the brain works. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757655) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:21 PM Author: impertinent pistol "our experience is the result of mental representations computed by the brain, but these mental representations don't have phenomenal properties that can't be accounted for by a materialist description of mental activity."
I don't disagree w this. |
|
Date: September 8th, 2018 3:10 PM Author: Outnumbered Business Firm who asked you you dumb nigger this isn't your fucking thread (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36770156) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:06 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman "Dont have phenomenal properties that can't be accounted for by a materialist description of mental activity"
This phrase doesn't mean anything. Illusionism is a linguistically possible but conceptual impossible position. Materialist descriptions can't account for any phenomenal properties qua phenomenology. And where are my perceptions located? If you look hard enough at that location will you see them too? |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:33 PM Author: Buck-toothed Gay Step-uncle's House Hairy Legs i meant that phenomenal properties don't exist so there is no explanatory problem for materialism, not that there is a class of phenomenal properties that can be explained by materialism and nothing else.
when you look, think or feel something, the only thing you are experiencing is a mental representation - a pattern of neural activations in your brain. these activations have no content, but only have meaning to the extent they relate to other representations. people are confused about this because many representations are transparent, so we don't experience them as representations. we simply see things like color and pain as real, objective parts of the world.
i am not entirely sure this view is correct, but it's parsimonious and is consistent with what we know about the brain. if you accept that the brain is simply a bunch of layered feature detectors, it has to be correct. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:36 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman "phenomenal properties don't exist"
I'm looking at xoxohth right now. It appears as a white screen with text. How does xoxohth not exist as a white screen with text given that i see a white screen with text? |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:50 PM Author: Buck-toothed Gay Step-uncle's House Hairy Legs your brain has learned to compress sensory input into useful representations of the visual scene flowing in through your optic nerve. as you look at the computer screen, some of these learned features (like letters, words and colors) are activated and signals are sent to higher levels of the brain for processing. when you ask yourself the question, "am i seeing a white screen with text?" you are simply asking if the learned visual features are currently activated.
i think attention schema theory provides a plausible account of why this explanation is not satisfying to most people. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:51 PM Author: impertinent pistol yes
As an interesting aside, when my child was very small, he described the off-white of the white chess pieces as yellow, so the pieces were "black and yellow".
I thought at the time that an older child would have said that the pieces were "black and white"--and the older child, or adult even, would have overlooked the fact that the chess pieces were actually sort of an offwhite or ivory color rather than simply "white."
But because my young son had not yet learned that chess pieces are "black and white," he could see that the pieces were not actually white but were instead yellow.
There's something foundational to art in this. |
|
Date: September 8th, 2018 3:12 PM Author: Outnumbered Business Firm he had just heard the song "black and yellow" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36770168) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:55 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman As below, that's fine. This isn't a debate about the objective independent existence of physical reality or the nature of the correspondence between representation and thing in itself. This is strictly about the irreducibility of the mental. Materialists are reductionist. The view you're describing is nonreductionist. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758382) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:01 PM Author: Buck-toothed Gay Step-uncle's House Hairy Legs how is it nonreductionist? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758418) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:09 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman i take reductionism to be the position that "mental states just are physical states" i.e. mental states contain no new property types that physical states could not possess.
I'm then suggesting that physical properties are those that can be observed - extension, mass, etc. Since you cannot observe a physical system "being in pain" (other than through behavior - you cannot feel another's pain), being in pain is not a physical property.
Then i just meant that because illusionism seems to conceed the existence of "feelings", and because feelings are not physical states, illusionists are not reductionists |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:10 PM Author: impertinent pistol jfc (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758493) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:11 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman get out of here you can't articulate a single thought itt or otherwise (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758496) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:16 PM Author: impertinent pistol Not really.
I'm just sort of amazed that you have a degree in philosophy but you seem to know nothing about it--or rather, you have some significant dunning kruger business going on on the topic. You sure like to "argue" about things without really grasping the subject. You make up words and generate an amusing word salad, but you don't even know the meaning of the words you use.
What a mental mess you've got going on up there.
Lol tell us again how it's "non reductionist" |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:22 PM Author: impertinent pistol If you WANTED to say it's nonreductionistic then the way to say it would be our understanding of things--the white xo screen for example--is as it is to us because we have over time developed a scheme or a way of managing data input. As a consequence, our understanding of what we are looking at at any time is conditioned on and dependent on our past experience and past processing. Accordingly, its non reductionistic in the way you are dependent on a host of prior experiences processing similar data unique to you.
Just say that. That makes more sense than the word salad you just generated--which I might add, has its own very bossy and didactic tone as well. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:26 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman sry bro tldr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758595) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:29 PM Author: impertinent pistol lol Not Fucking Surprising. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758622) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:30 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman u had ur chance little guy (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758626) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:32 PM Author: impertinent pistol yep, and I didn't let you go the route you wanted--I didn't let you go because it's fucking WRONG. But more than that, you don't even get to that WRONG--which is where you want to go but cant w what you bring to the table. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758642) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:35 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman lol did u take the day off to rage post today? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758666) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:43 PM Author: impertinent pistol stop trying to change the subject. Get your head together. Be honest with yourself. Look at things critically. Consider that many many people much smarter than you may on occasion have viable answers to your questions, worthy of your efforts to understand.
Now GTFO. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:44 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman you literally interloped on this subthread lmfao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758745) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:47 PM Author: impertinent pistol I was laughing at you being pressed to say why something was "non reductionist" and being unable to do so other than to generate a jumble of jargon and bizarre examples that showed a number of misunderstandings about the whole operation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758757) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:49 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman no one agrees with you. sorry. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758768) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:50 PM Author: impertinent pistol nope.
But FWIW, is that what its about? getting consensus? Seems like potentially a childish way of going about things when there's no threshold entrance requirement to the discussion. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:52 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman im suggesting to you that the reality you're living in where you don't come off like a vacuous, projecting, tone deaf, rageaholic is inaccurate from almost every subjective viewpoint but your own. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758795) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:55 PM Author: impertinent pistol you keep using the word vacuous but you obviously don't have any idea what it means bro. How else are you wrong itt jfc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758828) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:56 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman vacuous, like your penis. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758834) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:58 PM Author: impertinent pistol no, vacuous like your propositions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758852) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:41 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman lol i just read this and you have no idea what nonreductionist means. reductionism vs nonreductionism is an ontological distinction, not a theory of correspondence. lmfao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758726) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:45 PM Author: impertinent pistol dummy. you couldn't say why you thought it was nonreductionist even when pressed to explain why you thought it was nonreductionist.
The reason for that is because you are just fucking wrong.
I then demonstrated an avenue upon which the argument could nonetheless be made theoretically that it was nonreductionist.
Now Your pissed off because you didn't think of it yourself.
Now you again respond with some misapplied jargon in the hope that other readers wont see how badly you keep pwning yourself ITT.
Knock it off. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:47 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman you're really embarrassing yourself now man. everyone is laughing at you. no one takes you seriously. you're like cow goes moo, but worse. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758763) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:49 PM Author: impertinent pistol Not really.
But your efforts to convey this belief right now speak volumes about you.
If you were living in the 90s right now, you would definitely have a turdy looking goatee. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:49 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman you don't hear what other people hear. and not in a cool way. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758776) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:51 PM Author: impertinent pistol ive no idea what this means but it sounds sort of infantile.
Why don't you mix in some more confused theological terminology --THAT should get us somewhere for sure! |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:52 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman like. your. penis? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758796) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:54 PM Author: impertinent pistol so … you've got nothing then. Got it. Fucking nothing. GTFO. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758816) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:54 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman like. your. penis? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758819) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 5:57 PM Author: impertinent pistol no. like the value of your "philosophy degree" you self-important undergrad w his hands up and wrong fucking answer every goddam time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758847) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:04 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman lol the best part about this is you shift these philsoophical arguments immediately to personal attacks, even after extreme patience on my end, because you lose the philosophy stuff right away (i.e. you think reductionism in the philosophy of mind has to do with the appearance/reality distinction, when it's minimally part of an epistemic, and usually an ontological, distinction), but then you lose the personal stuff too because you're a self-hating small dicked shitlawyer married to a fob asian raising someone else's son. i don't know why you do this to yourself lmao (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758880) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:06 PM Author: impertinent pistol okay faggot. answer the question you still haven't fucking answered coherently--because you cant.
"your brain has learned to compress sensory input into useful representations of the visual scene flowing in through your optic nerve. as you look at the computer screen, some of these learned features (like letters, words and colors) are activated and signals are sent to higher levels of the brain for processing. when you ask yourself the question, "am i seeing a white screen with text?" you are simply asking if the learned visual features are currently activated.
i think attention schema theory provides a plausible account of why this explanation is not satisfying to most people."
Explain how its "nonreductionist."
This should be interesting--in a trainwreck sort of way.
The real question is how you think you can squeeze "god" in there.
Ready, go! |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:06 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman asked and answered shitlawyer (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758889) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:09 PM Author: impertinent pistol oh, right-you think your confused jumble of misunderstandings constitutes an "answer" of sorts.
Okay--explain wtf you are talking about in the context of "Non reductionism" when you say:
"I take reductionism to be the position that "mental states just are physical states" i.e. mental states contain no new property types that physical states could not possess.
I'm then suggesting that physical properties are those that can be observed - extension, mass, etc. Since you cannot observe a physical system "being in pain" (other than through behavior - you cannot feel another's pain), being in pain is not a physical property.
Then i just meant that because illusionism seems to conceed the existence of "feelings", and because feelings are not physical states, illusionists are not reductionists."
This is fucking horrible dude. holy shit. explain to me just how the fuck you think this possibly answers the question.
|
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:12 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman do you think that when i wrote that i meant for those words themselves to explain what i meant? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758906) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:14 PM Author: impertinent pistol you mean you think those words were in any way responsive to how a view was "non reductive"?
What the above blather shows is in part you don't even understand the first thing about a subject as significant as materialism. its like all you do is straw man shit, or try to, but it's just fucking horrible. Like a monkey w a grab bag of philosophical jargon words printed on tiles |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:16 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman u are a shittttttyyyyy lawyer (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758923) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:17 PM Author: impertinent pistol I studied law, and now I practice it.
You... studied philosophy … and … ? not practicing philosophy--that much is sure. you've just been annoying the fuck out of everyone. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 6:18 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman lmfao "I PRACTICE LAW"
you practice *something* |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:49 PM Author: impertinent pistol yes (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36758347) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 4:53 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman We're not debating the ontological status of my perceptions as corresponding to independently existing entities or not, simply whether I have phenomenal experiences. You suggested that you feel something, namely a mental representation. Fine! I don't care what I'm feeling. I feel something, whether it corresponds to something out there or it's some self referential system of representations.
If your describing illusionism correctly them it's not a theory of mind it's more of a philosophy of science |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 3:16 PM Author: heady candlestick maker itt: retards scuffling (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36757669) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 8:42 PM Author: misanthropic wine stage Retard stoner sp is dead wrong. Sure consciousness feels like it's categorically different than nerve stimuli, but if you're a typical white or asian guy in finance or consulting and want to get into HBS or Stanford, it will be VERY tough to do so without at least one big name company on your resume. Poets and quants actually did a rather comprehensive breakdown of the first-year at class at wharton by looking at the students' undergrad schools and places of employment. To no one's surprise the blue chips and ivy league schools were disproportionately represented, and for the students who did not to go top schools, almost all of them worked at a name brand firm. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36759809) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2018 8:42 PM Author: Ruddy address skinny woman (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36759811) |
|
Date: September 9th, 2018 1:50 PM Author: grizzly hairraiser jap cuckold (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36775300) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2018 3:02 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle erotic abode baff (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36770109) |
|
Date: September 8th, 2018 3:20 PM Author: Jet-lagged weed whacker Spaceporn having a bad day or what? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4070724&forum_id=2#36770214) |