RE: On naturalism and consciousness
August 27, 2014 at 9:14 pm
(This post was last modified: August 27, 2014 at 9:16 pm by Whateverist.)
(August 27, 2014 at 10:05 am)ChadWooters Wrote:(August 27, 2014 at 1:35 am)whateverist Wrote: I'm not sure why you bother with the word "know". Why not stick to "faith"? I have great faith in my ability to observe and interpret my subjective experience. But no way would I throw around claims of knowing it in an interpersonally persuasive way. Our epistemic position in trying to describe and explain our inner workings just is not all that good. Fortunately not much rides on it. It fascinates me but I won't go hungry if I get it wrong.Actually, a great many important things depend on the ability to know. The calculations I perform for work depend on knowledge like the a^2 + b^2 = c^2. And getting through life often requires an ability to know that thing cannot simultaneously be and not-be. Other things I take on faith, like that my mother loves me.
Now I think you may have had something in mind like believe in God. I have no problem saying that I know there are transcendent non-physical aspects of reality. That has been fairly well established in the Western philosophical tradition extending from Plato to Kant. I really do not take the objections to non-physical reality very seriously since our very ability to reason requires the intellect to reference attributes that span multiple physical manifestations.
I think you realize I would agree that you are justified in deciding whether or not your mother loved you - even if you are mistaken. You at least know if you felt loved. But do you know it in the same way you understand the Pythagorean theorem? I don't think so. You can prove that a couple of hundred ways where as the evidence you can offer for your mother's love is of a completely different sort all together. You can call it "knowing" if you like but in so doing you have diluted what ever significance you were hoping would accrue to it.
But I'm not someone who denies the reality of subjective states - as such. What I am contesting is any conclusions you think you have reached about the significance of your subjective experience in determining anything beyond your personal reality. It is your baby, call it what you like. Think what you will. I've heard nothing to persuade me to endorse any of your conclusions.