New answers tagged

0

A "dog" cannot give consent in the same way a tree cannot. While you may be tempted to rub its bark up the wrong way, it is just a "thing" -- that happens to have sexual organs. As we may, or may not, learn from the history of suppositories, "sexual organs" ought be treated with a certain intelligence. Why are you even asking this lol?


0

Free will has direct relation with the sense of I, without I there is no Free will. Consciousness has levels: perception. thinking. sense. All of these levels have direct relation with the I-ness, hence, has direct relation with Free will. Free will doesn't mean that all the I wants takes place, but it is a mixture, a blend of sometimes takes place and ...


0

Whether "free will" exists, or not, or the concept is meaningless, is irrelevant to the question of the adaptive benefit of consciousness. The reason is that whatever "free will" might possibly mean, it is definitely meaningless without consciousness. So, in the evolutionary process, consciousness either does, or does not, evolve; if it does, this might, or ...


1

Consciousness concerns awareness of one's environment and possibly some introspective knowledge if such there be. Deterministic consciousness need not lack utility. On the contrary: if there is a deterministic explanation of my seeing a dangerous animsl heading towards me, and if this visual experience connects with my deterministic desire to survive, then ...


0

...that feeling that we are a separate entity from others and the world (even though many would say there is no real separation at all)... In eastern philosophies and spirituality it's mainly called "Non-duality" also Separateness or Connection duality and Duality to Oneness. According to this idea mind and consciousness are two separated entities ...


-1

I don't know if this is the same as you are asking for, but in the Cartesian point of view there is a bifurcation, called cartesian bifurcation, between the res extensa e the res cogitans. The "res extensa" is the latin for the extended thing, or the "external world". The "res cogitans" is the thinking thing, or the minds.


0

There is a lot of current writing on this. Here is a recent article covering some of the issues: Artificial intelligence: where’s the philosophical scrutiny? And here is a recent book: Artificial You: AI and the Future of Your Mind


1

Yes you should care because after 5 minutes you are already a different person who just happens now to have a twin sister whom people are talking about murdering. In the "Many Worlds" interpretation of QM this happens all the time anyway. Most of us don't worry too much about what happens to the versions of us in all the parallel universes because we've got ...


-1

I just call it dualism but this can cause misunderstandings. 'Global', 'Metaphysical' or 'Absolute' dualism might work. The problem is that there doesn't seem to be a precise term in general use. This may be because this form of dualism is rarely contemplated or considered where mysticism is rejected, so there's no need for such a term in the tradition of ...


0

In short, Consciousness is our collective experience of sensing time & space. This is my personal definition. It may appear elusive until we understand it properly. Now, I will elaborate on the definition. The mechanism of an 'experience' is processing of the information in the brain. By 'sensing time & space', I meant sensing passage of time with ...


-1

I cannot think of any term expressing directly this separation. The term " ipseity" ( selfhood) expresses the fact of having a relation to oneself, the fact of identifying oneself as a distinct entity. Locke, in Essay, II, 27 describes this property of self : " being to oneself what one calls oneself". Some concepts refer to the relation between the self ...


1

The basic presumption of this question is that there are two set of individuated (unique and independent) objects — objects in conscious experience, and objects in the physical world — that may be related by one of these various schemas. That presumption is extremely difficult to justify. Conceptual objects have imprecise boundaries, are malleable, ...


0

Ignore "consciousness" etc. Mathematically you have a relationship between two sets, where for each set, this statement is either true or false: Every element maps to exactly one element in the other set. There are 4 possible combinations (2 sets, each with 2 possible descriptions). There is no 5th possibility.


-1

The key to this lies in the first line: "Man is a Spirit but what is Spirit?" He goes on to say that spirit is a tension. Contemporary science claims that humans are no different than any other animals. This is the empiricist/behaviorist fallacy which still haunts us today. This Kierkegaardian 'tension' pushes and pulls at us attempting to tear apart our ...


Top 50 recent answers are included