(September 18, 2016 at 12:12 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:I'm experiencing slight irritation right now. I get irritated, therefore I am.(September 17, 2016 at 10:54 pm)bennyboy Wrote: An apple is an apple because we call it that. Being aware is consciousness because we call it that. Not really sure what your contention is-- that awareness is an illusion? Fine-- who's experiencing the illusion? Whoever/whatever that is, it's conscious, by definition.
You're so droll. Nothing is experiencing. There is no who. Try to exert yourself a little and move beyond mere word games.
Quote:You're full of shit. Consciousness, isn't. You claim that consciousness is. That's a claim that requires more support than a stupid semantic argument or saying that it's self-evident. You've never been shy that you believe in Idealism. What is that Idealism world composed of if consciousness isn't a real thing? And here you are trying to deny the ontology your well-known Idealism requires. If consciousness isn't what it appears to be, then your "world of ideas" is an empty non-space. You're simply being dishonest in pretending agnosticism here.First of all, I don't "believe in" idealism. I'm agnostic about the nature of reality, but I consider a kind of experiential idealism a better default position than a material monism. This is because there's a 100% chance that all knowledge is known only by a subjective agent, and an unknown chance that all subjective agency is dependent on a material substrate. 100% > not sure, any day of the week.