RE: Seeing red
January 16, 2016 at 5:42 pm
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2016 at 5:54 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(January 15, 2016 at 10:38 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I think this is the essence of our difference in this:I see it as phenomena, not a rule. I attempt to explain the unknown by way of the known. It's not as though I have any other method (nor do you).
You see the human mind as a rule, established by behavior, and are willing to extend that rule to non-human physical systems with similar behaviors unless you have a good reason not to.
Quote:I see the apparent lack of mind in the majority of objects as the rule, and I'll extend that rule to all objects unless I have sufficient reason to believe it doesn't apply. But given advanced robotics and computing, I don't think behavior is a sufficient reason, since behaviors can (or could reasonably soon) be mimicked.You see a lack of a mind in objects ignoring that you yourself are an object, but we aren't discussing "objects" - we are discussing things which behave as we behave, which -seem- the way we -seem-.
Quote:I find it ironic that as a materialist, you find it easy to see mind in many things, and as an idealist (kind of), I find it so easy not to believe that things have minds as I do, even when they might seem to.I find it easy to see mind in those things which act in the manners that we do, upon those metrics which -you and I both- accept some notion of mind. Why, Benny...why do you think that I have a mind, why do you allow me this attribute? What makes you think I have qualia, and why do you think (as I know you do) that my qualia and your qualia are similar?? The answer to these questions can -only- be an affirmation of my espoused positions - even if they are wrong as a matter of fact.
In truth you and I have no difference here...we both think that the same thing is going on with regards to mind (we merely point to different "stuff" as the culprit), as we've discussed before. Acknowledging this, however, will not allow you to assert your idealism as a better explanation than my materialism. Regardless, I appreciate our disagreement and our ability to disagree and still be noob crushing buddies simultaneously. Rare round these parts.
#intellectual bromance. I joined these boards to have discussions like this with people like you. Who are we, why are we we....as we are, and what does that mean?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!