addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscontroller-playcredit-cardcrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobe--smallglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1languagelaunch-new-window--smalllight-bulblinklocation-pinlockm-swarmSearchmailmediummessagesminusmobilemoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonprintShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahooyoutube

Charlotte Philosophy Discussion Group Message Board › For those reading the book For Everyone: The Mind-Body Problem (And Free Wil

For those reading the book For Everyone: The Mind-Body Problem (And Free Will Versus Determinism): The Most Important Philosophical Problem

A former member
Post #: 8
I did not say a rock has consciousness, but I was pointing out someone could make that argument. I said a thermostat has consciousness very roughly 100 quintillion times less complicated than human consciousness. I did not say pain is a requisite for consciousness, but mentioned earlier that a connection could be made. Also, to be clear, I did not say a perception of self or awareness of self is a prerequisite for consciousness or an awareness of external things.

There is a converse position: instead of trying to see how closely machines are already like brains, we see how much brains are too much like a machine. For example, someone someday might be able to build a machine that did everything exactly like a human brain, meaning by all scientific methods it acted and responded like a human brain. It could tell you has a concept of self and gives accurate detailed facts you agree with, and tells you it has pain if you press a certain button and it tries to convince you not to push the button. The programmer of such a machine might say "it's just a program, it has no pain or consciousness", but a scientist having no evidence it was different than what goes on in a brain would have to inform the programmer that if his machine was unconscious and without pain, the it should not be assumed the programmer himself has those qualities.

A former member
Post #: 79
You do know you are an idiot?
Helen
paxtonhc
Charlotte, NC
Post #: 161
Why such name-calling? Reminds me of the bully in the playground. No excuse. In attempting to demean Bill, you have demeaned yourself.
Bill Van F.
wvanfleet
Group Organizer
Charlotte, NC
Post #: 2,058
This was Chuck Pyburn. He comes and goes, and posts only to provoke responses. He is selling his books, and I think does this to get more Google references. His agent is Todd Watlington, who seems a little more interested in actual dialogue at times.

I have no evidence that anyone has actually made it all the way through this book on the mind-body problem.
A former member
Post #: 96
Bill did approach a tough subject and he did give it his best so I applaud him for that.
Bill Van F.
wvanfleet
Group Organizer
Charlotte, NC
Post #: 2,096
Bill did approach a tough subject and he did give it his best so I applaud him for that.
Welcome back, Chuck.
A former member
Post #: 125
Free will and determinism, it comes down to choice. What life will you have, what mate will you have, what job will you have, and finally, what kind of person will you be? And then comes the rub, if your choice is contrary to my choice then what will the outcome be? The answer is really quite simple, the more aggressive and devastating the one choice will overcome the second choice, unless the second choice is an idea greater than the first choice. A woman will always choose her man and a man man will always choose his destiny. Let us talk about choice.
Bill Van F.
wvanfleet
Group Organizer
Charlotte, NC
Post #: 2,112
Those are questions that probably can produce productive thought, but you are posting on this topic something outside the subject of the topic. In what you have said, you have ignored what the book is about, having to do with the philosophical problem as to whether there is such a thing as free will (ability to choose), or whether the universe operates according to rules such that whatever you decide to do you were bound to decide when the universe began, and issues related to that. I have the impression that you have not read the book that this topic is about, or at least are not interested in discussing what is written in the book, the purpose of this topic.

The best way to make use of this topic is to take the first sentence in the book that seems unclear or incorrect in the context in which it was written, to quote that sentence and its surrounding context (usually 1-2 paragraphs), and then to give your reasons for believing the statement is unclear or incorrect. Then I and others can respond meaningfully and relevantly.
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy