I’m in SF for most of the year… And, I keep both legs fully covered. Most people don’t believe me about the legs either until they actually see them. Of course, they don’t look nearly as bad now as they did 10 years ago right after the accident.
MatthewB
Karma: 421
Till what was brought up?
I just thought of one additional point here.
When I make the claim that I am a Zombie, I am not really making the claim in the same sense that someone with Cotard’s Delusion would make, but rather as a response to people like Searle who posit that there is some extra special stuff that human consciousness has, and to which Dennett (and others) have replied with the Zombie counter to this claim.
So, I maintain that I am a zombie in the Dennett sense of the word. I am just like a normal human with the extra special stuff, just I don’t have that extra special stuff and thus, I am not really conscious, but just mimicking consciousness; thus, a Zombie.
She’s pretty well known in the Houston Texas Goth scene (or, rather, she was 10 years ago). You’ve never been involved in some of the earlier musical sub-cultures have you (And I don’t mean the watered down 90s/00s versions that some of these became)?
The Punk scene in the 70s/80s was pretty much like that, only Renee missed he boat by a few years.
If you don’t wish to believe it, however, then don’t...
I didn’t mean any one life (such as your life), but human life as in the trajectory of the sum total of human experience.
The Unabomber manifesto is an incredibly dense piece of prose. I found it hard to get through, but you are correct. Ted lived in mortal fear of the Intelligentsia being in control because he thought that they were all as psychopathic as he. I would fear a bunch of emotionless robots who hated humanity in charge even if they did run everything in as rational a fashion as possible.
It is likely that the educated and intelligent elite will one day in fact control most of the wealth in the world, and by de facto the actual running of the world under nearly impotent governmental cover. I think that this may well be a side-effect of the Singularity, and if a Friendly AI is indeed developed, it may wind up being very much like The Forbin Project (Except that the AI will not need to threaten us, as it will probably be fantastically capable of just manipulating the masses into the behavior it wishes).
As long as basic freedoms are preserved, I could care less if we were governed by a mindless mob, a group of super-geniuses, or ducks pecking at a light board to play tic-tac-toe to cast legislation.
Maybe some day after I have made more in-person acquaintance of more people on the list.
I agree, but I think our entire system of Justice is broken. It doesn’t rely nearly enough on the right kind of evidence and the term “Peers” (as in jury of your) is all but meaningless.
The fact that it is supposed to deal in evidence is, however, the right place to begin.
I shall have to make note of that fact.
My life has been a collection of extremes, from extremely secretive (even Spooky in all senses that could be imagined) to highly public (minor celebrity attained from falling asleep at just the right moment)…
Add to the fact that almost all of it has been lived in a quasi-Punk Rock lifestyle, and the phrase “Too much information” was something that I had never heard a person say until I left both of those lives behind (neither by choice, but for the better)
Upon reading it again (and with some input from a friend who is a logician—he said that this is something that he said I should have been able to understand myself—and upon going over it with him again, I discovered he was right), I get that there is this distinction now.
I don’t think consciousness is necessarily a binary distinction for any part of the brain, or any thing for that matter. This does mean that it could be 0⁄1, but that it is likely that most things capable of exhibiting conscious behavior lie between the two degrees.
That’s kind of funny considering that I have a significant portion of my shins that are putrefying in fact (this is the origin of the “I am a Zombie” claim). I have gaping wounds on my shins from a motorcycle accident.
That is funny that they have a real delusion for it. I’ll bet that one of my ex’s would know about it. She’s a for real necrophiliac, and was actually fired once for having sex with a corpse (She’s a mortician/embalmer). She used to drool over my legs and would always ask me to not change the bandages for a few days so that the stink would increase… That relationship didn’t last long.
Most of the Men were in total agreement with me, and more than a few women. She had a cadre of loyal dykes who backed her up and tried to intimidate others in the class.
One of her loyal lesbians even tried to say that Darwinian Evolution was (made up word coming) a male-o-centric theory of the Maleocracy.
They were the types who used words like Herstory, instead of History. If you watch the Futurama Movie Into the Wil Green Yonder there is a group of Femi-nazis led by one Frida Waterfall who talked just like them.
To all of whom downvoted this comment.… I have corrected the misspelling of dyke, yet due to my history and relationship with my past, I will not correct what is probably perceived as a very un-PC comment. You will have to meet me and learn more about my past to understand why I would not apologize for this comment.
Something worries me about this. It seems to say that Consciousness is a quantifiable thing, and as such, certain living things (babies, cows, dogs/cats, fish) may not meet the standards for Consciousness?
Or, am I reading it wrong??? I’m probably reading it wrong, please tell me I’m reading it wrong (if that is what I am doing).
Really, because I claim that I am a zombie. At least, that is the claim I make to all of my philosophy profs.
I completely agree. A UCSC professor named Donna Haraway, who wrote A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Social-Feminism in the late-Twentieth Century is an excellent example of a professor who is capable of putting a gender emphasis upon the issues of sexual roles in society, sociology, and history.
It was she to whom I went to discuss the issue after discovering she was at UC Santa Cruz (I had already read the book a few years prior to the Class with the crazy teacher).
I had taken a women’s studies class because my ex-wife died from being sexually exploited while strung out on crack cocaine (typical crack whore story), and I figured that I might have something to learn from it. Dr. Haraway informed me that I was expecting too much, as most women’s studies teachers are incredibly biased and emotionally driven and don’t take to facts too well.
I don’t agree with much of Dr. Haraway’s politics, but at least she has sound arguments for her position, rather than appeals to emotion or ignorance. Now, some of the premises of her arguments I would question, but that is the whole point isn’t it. That we argue the premises and from those we attempt to form a sound argument, rather than throwing together an argument that consists of “It would be horrible if it were any other way!”
Duh! She forbade me to use my computer to fact check in class… And, she got really, really pissed off at anything I said (now arranging my facts before class by listening to what she was harping on about in the class prior to mine) that contradicted her rather bizarre world view.
I later discovered, from the dept. chair, that she had a paranoid episode right after she had been granted tenure. She’s been under pretty intense pressure to retire since then...
I’ve never received a grade below a B in English or Composition classes since the 6th grade, yet she gave me a D, simply because I objected to her irrational world view where we needed to give up all technology and return to nature. She was very much one of those “We must honor the Noble Savage” types.
I think that Gender Studies classes are hard to find decent instructors for. I am having to file a complaint of discrimination against mine. Rather than raising things as points for consideration, she raised all manner of things as fact (without room for discussion), and when I began to call her on these “Facts” (A simple wikipedia entry usually sufficed to show that her “Facts” were completely bogus)edit she forbade me to fact check her work in class (on my laptop)/edit. When I later spoke to one of the UCSC gender studies instructors, she said that this was a problem in Gender studies. That often the instructors are militant feminists with bones to pick… So sad.
I have had the unfortunate experience to watch, not once, but twice the misuse of forensics to convict someone, in direct opposition to not one, two or three witnesses to the contrary, but four or five people who had testified that a person could not have committed a crime… Yet, the CSI Effect was in full play, and it was not until the arrest of the actual criminal in the first case and DNA exoneration in the second that the people involved were acquitted (and in one case, released. Thankfully after a very short stay in county jail, before they were moved to an actual prison).
My family also has a larger number of lawyers than normal, and this was something that was driven into us at an early age “Forensics are a bunch of BS for the most part”. Now, that lesson was also tempered with another side “Forensics are a bunch of BS, Unless they help out your case”
Are you saying that a High-Status person necessarily thinks that they are high-status?
Or, that a low status person may delude themselves in a high-status position?
One of the things I was thinking was that you, Eliezer, are very much a high-status person in regards to many others in the Singularity Crowd. You may not be high-status in terms of wealth, or power, yet you are definitely a person to whom others seek to curry favor from (Just look at the crowds you draw at the events where I have seen you).
I’ve made it a matter of personal interest to investigate how status influences our actions and reactions, and I would say that you get a high amount of deference from others. That tends to make you a person of high-status.
Now, you may not have the raw-neurochemistry of a person who is a born leader, yet there you are, with a number of people looking to you for advice, conversation and opinion.
I am not entirely sure what the claim would actually consist of.
Dennett claims that a human looking zombie, that acted exactly like a person, yet failed to have this special stuff that Searle claims is necessary for consciousness, would be unrecognizable from a person who really did have whatever it is that Searle claims is the Magic Ingredient to consciousness. Its really more just a claim to mock Searle’s Chinese Room than anything else.
I guess though, that if I had to take a stance, it would be that there is nothing metaphysically special about consciousness. Now, this is just my naive assumption based on only a few years of reading, and none of it at the levels I will be forced to face in the coming years as I complete my degree. However, it is the sense that I get from what I have read and considered.