[ExI] Chalmers

[William Flynn Wallace]

Gimme a break - I am just a short piece into the book.  Also, I do not have
any background in the subject of consciousness.  I tried reading Dennett
but gave up.  I disagreed with him but cannot remember why.

Mostly, in your post, I do not know what 'computationally bound' means.

bill w

On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:56 AM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> That almost makes sense.
> Learning, programming, and memory are mostly subconscious since there is
> no computational binding of that into consciousness.
> It all must be "recalled" into our consciousness (computationally bound)
> CPU, before we are consciously aware of it.
> So, given that, are you/they saying that consciousness (that which is
> computationally bound) is not "psychological"?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:27 AM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> Chalmers divides consciousness into two parts:  psychological (like
>> learning and memory), and phenomenal - the experience of it- being awake, I
>> suppose.  Is that customary?  bill w
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:14 AM Brent Allsop via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Sheesh.
>>>
>>> Yes, Hermes, you nailed it with “philosophers try to explain their
>>> theories in the most complicated way possible to obfuscate potential errors”.
>>> It’s so frustrating to spend years, trying to understand, and even canonize
>>> all that “popular” consensus, only to find nothing there but ever more
>>> “hard” problems and meaningless circular definitions.  To me, there are
>>> problems with all theories that separate qualia (using separating terms
>>> like qualia “supervene” on something) are problematic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By the way, we’ve recently put-up new versions of the first 5 chapters
>>> on our video. “Consciousness: Not a Hard Problem, Just a Color Problem.
>>> <https://canonizer.com/videos/consciousness/>”  Hopefully, that is
>>> something people can understand, and experimentalists can use to finally
>>> falsify all the “crap in the gap” philosophies hiding in our ‘qualia
>>> blindness”
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 8:44 AM Hermes Trismegistus via extropy-chat <
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That’s the problem with philosophers. They like making up their own
>>>> terminology. It can be difficult to distinguish the gibberish from the
>>>> coherent. In this case Chalmers is trying to say that something is
>>>> reducible if the workings of the whole is explainable in terms of the parts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my experience philosophers try to explain their theories in the most
>>>> complicated way possible to obfuscate potential errors. Politicians use the
>>>> same technique and seeing exactly where the error is can be difficult. I
>>>> suggest you read something more intellectually honest such as a physics or
>>>> mathematics book.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From: *William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat
>>>> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, March 2, 2021 10:29 AM
>>>> *To: *extropolis at googlegroups.com; ExI chat list
>>>> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>>>> *Cc: *William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
>>>> *Subject: *[ExI] Chalmers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my constant effort to keep my brain working, I am trying The
>>>> Conscious Mind.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "A natural phenomenon is reductively explainable in terms of some lower
>>>> level properties if the property of instantiating the phenomenon is
>>>> globally logically supervenient on the low level properties in question."
>>>> "A phenomenon is reductively explainable simpliciter if the property of
>>>> instantiating that phenomenon is globally logical supervenient on physical
>>>> properties."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have I bit off more than I can chew?
>>>>
>>>> bill w
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20210302/ee99037e/attachment.htm>