(October 26, 2013 at 4:36 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Just a bit. Quantifiable and third-party observable changes in the brain have a causal relationship with qualitative first-person experiences. We all agree on that. The character of that causal relationship remains an open question. You assume that the brain states generate mental properties. That may not be the case. Brain states could instead facilitate mental properties. For example, when you turn on a radio and hear music, the radio does not create the music. When you change stations, you have changed the state of the radio so as to receive something external to itself. Music is not an emergent property of radios.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but I still can't bridge the gap to making that a philosophical question: you can't really demonstrate physical phenomena through philosophy alone, after all.
You're right that we can't demonstrate that the brain isn't some form of channeler for consciousness, but then, I'm willing to tentatively accept a causal relationship rather than throw that away due to an inability to disprove a contradicting hypothesis. My mind remains open to the possibility, but when a guy like enrico states that something is the case based on nothing more than his own refusal to bring evidence... well, that gets me interested in an argument.

"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!