Philosophy Now Forum

Identifying a problem does not constitute "evidence." If it falsifies a particular hypothesis, then it very much constitutes as evidence. I am not asserting that it does falsify the view, but it remains to be demonstrated how it doesn't. You still haven't been explicit about what kind of ...

Empirical data is data acquired through the external sense organs That's one hypothesis, one that you've resisted so far. There are two different cases for the internal/external distinction here. The first case, and the case that I'm NOT calling into question, pertains to a human body and to its en...

How can [empirical evidence] be obtained from a domain hypothesised to be beyond consciousness? I'm saying that consciousness does not fall into that category of itself labeled "empirical." You explicitly defined perceptions to be in consciousness, and your refusal to label those percepti...

How can empirical evidence can be obtained from a domain hypothesised to be beyond consciousness? Empirical evidence is part of consciousness (yes, your definition since you keep asking). How that evidence is interpreted is a matter of choice and logical consistency. How can it be obtained from a d...

we need to move to the next stage: can we "do science"? On my use of the word "consciousness" (which I described earlier in our converstation) we cannot. Well, not if you leave it there. You need to move on, consider evidence. Then science can be done. How can empirical evidence...

2. why do you consider this ontology of 'things' relevant to a discussion of consciousness? You said "it's impossible for me to doubt the existence of my consciousness", and that you welcomed constructive criticism, so I showed a valid view where consciousness (however defined) does not m...

Not trying to torture you. I started in on this 1) trying to grok your view (still don't know), and 2) trying to point out places you are making unjustified assumptions without knowing it. That has led us down this road, and I must compliment you that you seem to have genuine interest in this explo...

So tell me then, what is it that's missing? Your unstated premises are missing for one. I pointed it out, and don't find the premise necessary since no contradiction results from the lack of it. Did you read what I posted? Explain it like I'm somebody thinking about studying philosophy at universit...

What is missing from my comment that makes you identify it as a non-sequitur? I already explained this. Look up the part about "I am" not following from "I think". It requires an additional premise that isn't necessarily held. I for one don't accept the premise (that existence i...

Atla wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2025 2:08 pm That just means that there is something rather than (absolute) nothing. Yes there is something rather than (absolute) nothing. I don't see how that is relevant to what I was asking.

I don't see what's incoherent about it.

I'm with Kant on this one. Well I can't ask Kant why he was (imo) incoherent, but I can ask you. You could always be hallucinating, all your experiences could be illusions, or a computer simulation, or you could be a brain-in-a-vat, or you could be forever deceived by an evil demon, and so on. So y...

I think it's important how one treats the above epistemological constraint. Kant's point seems to have been that anything outside our consciousness is 100% unknowable, and he bet on the possibility that humans perceive these 100% unknowable things the same way (if those things and other humans exis...

You're going to have to explain exactly what it is you're requesting here. I'm not really requesting anything. What is missing from my comment that makes you identify it as a non-sequitur? and also different axioms Can you be explicit? I have no axioms, or at least try not to. There are things I wo...

On my use of the word "consciousness" there is nothing I know about that is NOT arising in "my consciousness," so it's impossible for me to doubt the existence of my consciousness. I find that to be a non-sequitur, partly due to a lack of demonstration of personal identity, You'...

If we take the existence of that "more real world" as axiomatic I don't think either of us is doing that, but I don't take the existence of the consciousness as axiomatic either, cogito ergo sum notwithstanding. On my use of the word "consciousness" there is nothing I know about...