|
|||||||
BS: Some Papers on Consiousness |
Share Thread
|
Subject: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Pied Piper Date: 13 Aug 05 - 06:42 AM Below are some papers on various aspects of consiousness I've found interesting. 1 2 3 4 5 Enjoy PP |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Clinton Hammond Date: 13 Aug 05 - 06:57 AM Too bad these people couldn't find real jobs.... |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: GUEST,mack/misophist Date: 13 Aug 05 - 09:39 AM Was it Sherlock Holmes who railed against theorizing in advance of data? A few comments from Wolfgang would be interesting. He may not care to get involved, though. |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 05 - 11:58 AM P: Many thanks. A lot of interesting viewpoints. Ignore CH -- he's a scurrilous ragamuffin who would never choose to read such a paper, would never strive to write one, has no concept of the time and effort involved and in fact if tasked, would be unable to produce one. He is one of them folksingers you hear about. A |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Clinton Hammond Date: 13 Aug 05 - 01:22 PM No... I'm someone with better things to do with my time besides sitting around playing with myself and staring into my belly-button... I have read, studied and produced such... that's how I know it's all a load of crap Actually, that's unfair to crap |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Aug 05 - 01:39 PM Staring into your belly button would really require a neck like a swan...And they don't have belly buttons. .......................... I'm a little teapot short and stout. Time up and pour me out. I think that's about as eloquent a summary of current understandinmg of consciousness you can find. |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: pdq Date: 13 Aug 05 - 01:42 PM We blue collar working class types have a word to describe those articles: gobbledegook. We know what is really important and don't need a PHD to prove it. Here are the three rules of life in the real world: 1. Respect the rights of others. 99% of people will do the same in return. Life can be good. 2. If you find some one who does not respect the rights of others (=bully), find a time when no witnesses are around and beat the living crap out of him. 3. Women get a free pass on everything. Something to do with hormones, I think. |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 05 - 02:02 PM All of which has nothing to do with the questions PP raises in his references. It is jolly fine to say "I don't need to think about consciousness -- I am too busy BEING conscious and doing stuff". You can leave all understanding up to higher powers, too, and content yourself with being an operating piece on the board. But striving to see more into the somewhat mysterious fact of consciousness is legitimate and possibly very rewarding, assuming one does not just grind into analysis paralysis or get bemused into various mystic or authoritarian webs. I doubt any of the grumblers here would like to offer a model of how consciousness happens to occur. And what its relationship to living forms actually is. I suggest that while there is no obligation on anyone to have any curiousity, being uncivil about the curiousity of others is a sort of crime. A |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Clinton Hammond Date: 13 Aug 05 - 02:08 PM "being uncivil about the curiousity of others is a sort of crime" No... it's calling a wanker a wanker... |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 05 - 02:17 PM Locked in hard, and y'ain't budging fer nuffin, huh, CH? Good thing yer right, or you might be uncomfortable. A |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Clinton Hammond Date: 13 Aug 05 - 02:59 PM How do you know I'm not both eh? :-P |
Subject: RE: BS: Some Papers on Consiousness From: Amos Date: 13 Aug 05 - 03:14 PM Oh, you may be, old friend. I do think you may be in for a surprise. Think of me when it happens! :D A |