On 9/19/2019 4:42 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 12:52:03 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
On 9/19/2019 2:45 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
> Don't you use definitions in physics, such as mass, energy,
velocity,
> acceleration, space, time, entropy? Without them, we simply
couldn't
> do physics. Here, as in your MW obsession, you seem opaque to
reality. AG
Sure. But ultimately they are all grounded in ostensive definitions.
Brent
Obstensively, like imagining anything like an elephant exists? But
what and
how is this imagining helpful in knowing what consciousness us, as
compared
to specific definitions used in physics as previously indicated? AG
Whether it's helpful or not, it's the basis we have to go on. Bruno
wants to define consciousness as whatever is self-referential, because
he can prove arithmetic is self-referential (given the right coding).
But I've seen billboards that are self-referential, so I don't think
that's a good definition. And even if it's true that consciousness if
self-referential (I have my doubts), so what? It's doesn't see that
essential to consciousness, since I very rarely refer to my consciousness.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/c11dd3d1-97b4-6acb-3bea-3a3ce34cf538%40verizon.net.
