recogitare.com

Actually, if it helps, instead of epiphenomenon, consider that I said emergent property instead. Since the definition of the former is contentious, I'll stop using that word. The alternate is not quite the same thing, but it still conveys what I'm going for.

President Bush wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 1:18 amOh, okay, I will assume you are not a zombie. Now a question:

Was the thoughtful reply to me that you just posted not a physical effect?

Again, levels. I'm not physically affecting my neurotransmitters when I reply to you, I'm physically affecting my computer.

arthwollipot, starting to sound like you don't know how epiphenomenalism is defined. Here is a definition: Not quite how I would have defined it, but it's okay I guess. Going back to what I said earlier... Epiphenomenalism isn't compatible with knowledge of our own mind so how in the world can you ...

Soory, saying that "consciousness is simply what brains do" seems a pretty meaningless response to my criticism of the claim/belief that consciousness is just an epiphenomenon of brain function. If you can't see what it means, that's not my fault. Epiphenomenalism isn't compatible with kn...

I have always booked ahead. That seems most common.

If that were so how can you know it's true? Because by altering or damaging brain function, you can change the perception of consciousness. You missed the point. How can one make the truth claim that consciousness is only an epiphenomenon of brain function? That would contradict itself. It's not co...

President Bush wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2024 1:40 pm

arthwollipot wrote: ↑Sun May 19, 2024 7:38 am Consciousness isn't that mysterious. It's just an epiphenomenon of brain function.

If that were so how can you know it's true?

Because by altering or damaging brain function, you can change the perception of consciousness.

Consciousness isn't that mysterious. It's just an epiphenomenon of brain function.

Seep.

Deep.