From: Dan Fabulich (daniel.fabulich@yale.edu)
Date: Mon Dec 20 1999 - 15:01:17 MST
'What is your name?' 'John Clark.' 'Do you deny having written the
following?':
> >Do you *assume* that consciousness is perfectly correlated with intelligence
>
> Yes.
>
> >or do hold that consciousness just IS intelligence by definition
>
> No.
>
> >just as heat just IS the bouncing of molecules, by definition
>
> You are unclear, the definition of heat is bouncing molecules and
> bouncing molecules is also perfectly correlated with heat . And I have
> no definition of intelligence or of consciousness, only examples.
Of course, A is universally correlated with A, and universally correlated
with B for all B such that A = B.
However, the point of asking that is to demonstrate that the move Damien
makes, while *I* might still be open to making a move like that, isn't
open to you, or to anyone else who believes in qualia as these entities
which cannot be observed 3rd personally. Heat isn't *just* correlated
with bouncing molecules, heat IS bouncing molecules. Similarly, I could
go on and say that consciousness IS intelligence, but intelligence isn't
that undeniable known-perfectly-only-to-me spooky thing John's referring
to, *consciousness* is.
> I don't understand, you were not asking about the universe, you were asking
> about me, in particular a preference of mine, what other answer could I give?
Motivational answers, of the form: "because I want X," or possibly
"because I ought to X." This is what I was getting at when I referred to
"levels of explanation." I agree that it is the case that you want
whatever you want on account of the way your brain is wired, but the level
of explanation I was referring to was the desires themselves, not the
wiring. Similarly, I'd say that the sky is blue becuase air molecules
absorb non-blue light, reflecting blue light back towards our eyes; I
wouldn't say that it's because the laws of physics are true, though,
again, that answer is correct.
Why do you choose to associate end of Consciousness with death?
(Motivational answers only, please!) Why not get rid of Consciousness as
an idea and say that "death" is when you're functionally dead?
On this topic, what would you mean by saying that consciousness is "not an
idea?" I wrongly put the question to ask what consciousness IS, but that
didn't go over well, so I'm trying again.
> I can say with complete confidence that my concern for consciousness and
> dislike of death has a cause OR it does not. If it does not then it's random
> and noting more needs to be said. If it does then it's because that's the way
> my brain is wired and nothing more needs to be said.
Again, I'm not making an argument for free will, I'm asking for
MOTIVATIONAL answers. You do have them, even if they're caused
non-motivationally.
-Dan
-unless you love someone-
-nothing else makes any sense-
e.e. cummings
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:06:09 MST