The “hard problem” is only a problem for those who fail to place organismic affect (homeostatic, emotional affect) at the foundation of their model. Once you conceptualize subjective experiences as an emergent characteristic of affect, the hard problem vanishes completely.
-
-
If I could answer that, we could all go home :-) The point I am stuck on is, the only explanation available to current science is a material mechanism. I can't see that it can fly; and I suggest …
-
I suggest there are 3 phases of matter: 1 Pile of bricks. Only panpsychists see consciousness here 2 Clockwork Mechanisms. No-one now sees consciousness here tho Chalmers' Structure & Dynamics possibly attacks it 3 Turing Machine. Here seek Dennett & most illusionists I think
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
May I try a different tack: Do we have anything to support saying “the mechanisms /produce/ mental content” rather than just saying “there are mechanisms and there is mental content”? Apart from metaphysical belief that dualism is wrong & there just can't be anything else
-
I agree about getting rid of the *causality* language. But I think we need at least a *correlation* language. Then whether there is any dualistic separation between “mental” and “physical” remains a question.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.