(March 16, 2016 at 1:42 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I see, so we won't be acknowledging the absurdity of the question you asked, then..will we? We'll jump off to some other pool because the water was no longer to our liking? Relevance fallacy.Metacommentary fallacy. You're not saying anything.
Quote:Very, because we're going to need to list out ways that those two examples of yours are unique in relation to something -other- than what they're made out of, specifically..you'll need to explain how they are unique as regards mind, or comp, or processing. Otherwise, you're continuing to pull the constant relevance fallacy refrain.Composition is an important part of function. You might think that mind is just input, processing and output. But the way things are processed is very important. Obviously, brains and computers process differently in very many ways.
Quote:You keep using the word "in".....and that's probably keeping you from understanding just this one type of material explanation for qualia.Mind is not all the brain, for sure. Therefore, if there's mind and it is brain function, it's in the brain.
Quote:I keep telling you that santas workshop doesn't exist and you keep responding by demanding that I point it out on a map.You keep telling me that a unified agency isn't a thing. Then I watch a movie, and realize that something is bringing together sound and light into an interesting experience. It's that unity that you have no answer for.
