I think it's more plausible that Dennett has ideological prejudices so powerful that they can overcome any intuitive evidence whatsoever, than that he has experiential defects. But it's interesting to think about how phenomenological differences could lead to theoretical ones, and whether they have in the past. — The Great Whatever
Well, what does imagining a diabetic racist sitting at home reading a cover-less copy of the Lord of the Rings consist of? I can understand having a quasi-visual image of a person reading a book, but the rest isn't so clear. — Michael
I actually had a specific picture pop up to your question. Clearly it could be different, but I saw something particular. — Moliere
I can certainly understand where Dennett is coming from in saying that this imagining is verbal in nature, that really just involves considering and understanding certain words and phrases. — Michael
Did you read my Temple Grandin quote where she said that she does not think verbally at all, but only in pictures? She has the opposite condition of aphantasia.
As for your difficult to visualize examples, someone like Grandin might not be able to visualize it, and would therefore have a hard time understanding what is meant, based on some of the other things she has written.
Why wouldn't people differ in their abilities to visualize and verbalize internally? — Marchesk
That is to say, I don't think there's anything at all unusual about those who say they have limited visualization skills — Hanover
Now, if there are partial p-zombies demonstrably [...] — The Great Whatever
Behaviorists are committed to the idea that exhibiting a particular behavior is a sufficient condition for being conscious, so for them a true p-zombie is an oxymoron. — SophistiCat
Isn't that the same thing as redefining consciousness? — Marchesk
What's the visual property of being a diabetic racist? How could you see that the cover-less book was the Lord of the Rings? What about the image of the location showed it to be that person's home? — Michael
What's the visual property of being a diabetic racist? — Michael
How could you see that the cover-less book was the Lord of the Rings? — Michael
What about the image of the location showed it to be that person's home? — Michael
Or as another example, what about imagining an invisible man reading an invisible book and imagining an invisible cat sitting on an invisible mat. Surely we can do both, but that in neither case is there any visual imagery. — Michael
So what, exactly, does this imagining consist of if not have some inner visual imagery? I can certainly understand where Dennett is coming from in saying that this imagining is verbal in nature, that really just involves considering and understanding certain words and phrases.
And if we can imagine invisible cats sitting on invisible mats in a verbal manner then surely we can imagine a visible zebra in a verbal manner. — Michael
Philosophers talk about whether p-zombies are metaphysically possible, but what a priori grounds do we have for ruling out the possibility that they're actual? — The Great Whatever
"When I think about my fiancee there is no image, but I am definitely thinking about her, I know today she has her hair up at the back, she's brunette. But I'm not describing an image I am looking at, I'm remembering features about her, that's the strangest thing and maybe that is a source of some regret."
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-34039054
They're not redefining consciousness, but claiming that what we refer to by consciousness is just behaviour. — Michael
It's similar to the physicalist who might say that what we refer to by consciousness is just electrical activity in the brain. — Michael
As I mentioned with Einstein, he had a big visual cortex, and wasn't as great with language. — Wosret
Wasn't the point about visualizing abstract triangles that you'd have to visualize a particular triangle (with certan angles etc) ? — csalisbury
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.