No, the first-person "reports" are just what they say after the event, which could be entirely fabricated or otherwise mistaken, with no possible way of checking, so it counts for nothing. — S
We normally only see clearly only at about the size of a deck of cards held at arm’s length (Try looking just a little away and the clarity goes way down)—this is the center of the tunnel which is caused by neuronal stripes. I am not really dying to go down the tunnel… — PoeticUniverse
mental modes that give rise to consciousness. — PoeticUniverse
No, it's not my interpretation, it's my reasonable conclusion. Do you have a way of verifying their "report"? Yes or no? If yes, explain. If no, then it counts for nothing, as opposed to evidence in favour of one possibility over others. — S
If there's no means of verification, then it counts for nothing. You accept that, then? Because I was under the impression that you wanted to count it as evidence. But it can't be, because it could be fabricated or mistaken. — S
What's "my model"? I haven't made the same claims as Terrapin, but I did somewhat rhetorically raise the question of whether there's any credible evidence of consciousness without a functioning brain. That link definitely counts for something, and it can indeed be verified. — S
It’s evidence to the people who experience it, and to doubt so many accounts just shows that you may be projecting your psychopathic behaviors onto others. A lot of atheists are psychopaths. Not all of them, but there is strong evidence that you are one. — Noah Te Stroete
That link definitely counts for something, and it can indeed be verified — S
They are just consensual taxonomy. — James Pullman
"It's evidence for them" is so lame a response as to be laughable, and noting the number of accounts is a fallacious appeal to the masses. Lots of people claim to have seen a ghost, too. — S
"It's evidence for them" is so lame a response as to be laughable, — S
You mean that they've encountered flying objects that they've been unable to identify? Big deal. That just means that they've encountered flying objects that they've been unable to identify, and nothing else. — S
Because it's meaningless, i.e. counts for nothing, to anyone who i) isn't that person, and ii) has their wits about them. — S
Yes I know what you mean, but it´s this kind of questions, posed this way, that drives good "minds" from looking for the answers — James Pullman
It doesn't matter one way or the other! — S
So you want to ply a little, or is this boring for you? Do you want a good question or a twisted idea? — James Pullman
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.