(September 17, 2016 at 10:15 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(September 17, 2016 at 6:48 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: So consciousness, which may be an illusion, is the sole testifying witness to the question of whether or not it's an illusion? That's circular as all hell. You might as well say, "because I believe." Your own consciousness, which may be lying to you, is not lying to you, "because your consciousness tells you it's not lying." Well you've persuaded me that your consciousness isn't lying to itself; how could I doubt you? That's stupid, Benny. Saying that it's self-evident is simply wrong. There is no such thing as self-evidence at that level. Something* must be making it evident, and that something is this consciousness thing that you say is not an illusion, why? Because it's obvious? That's a stupid, thoughtless response.You are making an error between proofs and definitions.
No, I'm pointing out that your claim of self-evidence is a silly circular argument. Consciousness is conscious because consciousness says so. Hurr durr.
(September 17, 2016 at 10:15 pm)bennyboy Wrote: If I'm aware of my consciousness lying. . . I'm conscious.!
This is nothing but an assertion based on loose language. You're just arguing in circles again. "I'm conscious because I'm conscious because I'm conscious because...." I don't think we are any more "aware" than a computer, and your response is that "it's obvious that we are!" That's not a demonstration of anything but that you don't know.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)