Proving What We Already "Know"

[bennyboy]

In fact, indeed.  You don't object to normal old truth, and make many normal old truth claims.  You doubt one in particular.  We don't even need to litigate which truth claims are and aren't really true to make that observation.  Have you given it much introspection?  It's one of those areas where you have to pick a lane.  Being skeptical of truth in total if it suggests a position you hold might be wrong, and vociferously committed to a competing truth claim that supports your position, probably isn't a very strong position.

No, I don't think you could find a "competing truth claim that supports your position."  Introspectionism is ALSO a categorical system (by which I mean a category of experiences with a context defined by one or more axioms)-- instead of being defined by acceptance of an objective shared universe that is not experiential in nature, it is defined by the axiom that others, in SEEMING conscious, most likely are.

I have to make pragmatic assumptions either way-- and those limit the scope in which inferences drawn in either context may be applied more generally.  For example, what if a robot SEEMED to be conscious, and talked a lot about introspection, and told me it dreamed of participating in a traditional peyote ceremony to learn more about its relationship to the Universal Spirit?  "Seems like me, so thinks like me" might not be so intuitively acceptable then.  In fact, I think a likely scenario for the complete obliteration of the human species, would be a social movement against Silicophobia, marches for robot rights, and so on, ultimately leading to complete control of the world's economy by AI machines that aren't, after all, "actually" conscious in that they can experience what things are like.

An aside to the Deists / theists / spiritualists in the room (I haven't yet figured out who you are), let me say that to me, "God created Man in His image" means "God created a living thing capable of knowing what things are like."