I’m not talking about dualism—my explanation is fully explained by the neurons alone. The “hearer” is nothing more than certain patterns of neuron firing, with absolutely zero mysteriousness left over (given sufficient detail on those neuron firing patterns).
Taking conciousness out of a person means physically changing their responsible neural patterns—which means at least something as severe as a lobotomy. Taking a person, leaving their brain alone, and removing ‘conciousness’ is physical nonsense.
I think you should spell out what you think they’re saying. I don’t see any signs that ThrustVectoring is misunderstanding the Zombie argument or the hard problem.
The “hearer” is nothing more than certain patterns of neuron firing
I agree, but of course you don’t literally mean what you’re saying here if you’re truly a reductionist. I think the problem people have thinking about this is that people are thinking about what we’re seeing in neurons with modern science, rather than what the neurons are actually doing and what the computations and physics they’re actually reducing to are.
Yes, I do literally mean this. Of course, when I say “patterns of neurons firing”, that is nothing more than a compact way to talk about the brain biochemistry and cells going on.
I’m not talking about dualism—my explanation is fully explained by the neurons alone. The “hearer” is nothing more than certain patterns of neuron firing, with absolutely zero mysteriousness left over (given sufficient detail on those neuron firing patterns).
Taking conciousness out of a person means physically changing their responsible neural patterns—which means at least something as severe as a lobotomy. Taking a person, leaving their brain alone, and removing ‘conciousness’ is physical nonsense.
Yes, I removed the bit about dualism in my post. However, again, what you’re saying is not the same thing Elezier is saying.
I think you should spell out what you think they’re saying. I don’t see any signs that ThrustVectoring is misunderstanding the Zombie argument or the hard problem.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/jat/consciousness_affecting_the_world/a5yb
I agree, but of course you don’t literally mean what you’re saying here if you’re truly a reductionist. I think the problem people have thinking about this is that people are thinking about what we’re seeing in neurons with modern science, rather than what the neurons are actually doing and what the computations and physics they’re actually reducing to are.
Yes, I do literally mean this. Of course, when I say “patterns of neurons firing”, that is nothing more than a compact way to talk about the brain biochemistry and cells going on.