Do you think that sugar has the same structure as, the same weight as, and the same appearance as Carbon oxygen and hydrogen?
I know that sugar has a different structure than... I asked whether sugar has a specific property so-called sweetness? Yes or no?
You are off thread.
I am right on the thread. You don't even want to accept that sweetness is an emergent property. You cannot have the cake and eat it. If sweetness is not an emergent property of sugar then what it is?
Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:33 pm
Emergence is when the whole has qualities not shared by the parts.
Here are the parts. Oxygen a colourless tasteless gas Hydrogen the lightest substance in the universe, also a colourless tasteless gas Carbon nonmetallic chemical element usually presenting as a dark solid such as graphite, or a transparent solid such as diamond.
But when combined in the right way, the resultant combination has qualities NOT present in the PARTS.
For example: sugar, methane, petroleum, and many other hydrocarbons.
QED emergence it true.
You already repeat that and that is not an argument. We all know that tasting sugar causes a sweet subjective experience. That is not proof for emergent. If it was, then by fact sugar must have a property which parts don't have.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:34 pm
The core of my argument is that there is an explanation for everything. Do you think that there is an explanation for everything or not?
Do you even know what an 'explanation' is?
Do you think there is an explanation for what an 'explanation' is?
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:50 pm
The explanation has a clear meaning and I know many examples of that. Things to me have an explanation. Your question is off-topic. That is it.
Off topic? How?
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:34 pm
The core of my argument is that there is an explanation for everything.
Do you think there is an explanation for meaning?
Last edited by Skepdick on Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:37 pm
A brain is greater than the sum of its parts. Those parts are neurons, axons and water.
That is not correct. If the brain is more than the sum of its parts then there must be a property which parts don't have.
Yes, it is correct! The brain has this property called "consciousness"!
It's a property that quarks, leptons and electrons don't have.
Great so consciousness is a property which parts of the brain don't have. If the brain has a new property like consciousness then the brain must have an extra measurable effect on its environment. All we observe, however, is mere electromagnetic filed which this is due to moving electrons rather than existence a new property like consciousness.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:04 pm
Great so consciousness is a property which parts of the brain don't have. If the brain has a new property like consciousness then the brain must have an extra measurable effect on its environment. All we observe, however, is mere electromagnetic filed which this is due to moving electrons rather than existence a new property like consciousness.
So what you are saying is that you would be happy to have your brain swapped out for an electromagnetic coil? They are basically the same thing!
Cool! When do we start with this medical procedure?
Last edited by Skepdick on Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:50 pm
The explanation has a clear meaning and I know many examples of that. Things to me have an explanation. Your question is off-topic. That is it.
Off topic? How?
Don't you think we need an explanation for meaning?
We are discussing whether there is an explanation for something rather than whether there is an explanation for why an explanation exist.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:07 pm
We are discussing whether there is an explanation for something rather than whether there is an explanation for why an explanation exist.
Correct! So...
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 2:50 pm
The explanation has a clear meaning
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 12:34 pm
The core of my argument is that there is an explanation for everything.
You seem to be saying that "meaningfulness" is a property of explanations, which begs the question: Do you think there is an explanation for meaning?
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:04 pm
Great so consciousness is a property which parts of the brain don't have. If the brain has a new property like consciousness then the brain must have an extra measurable effect on its environment. All we observe, however, is mere electromagnetic filed which this is due to moving electrons rather than existence a new property like consciousness.
So what you are saying is that you would be happy to have your brain swapped out for an electromagnetic coil? They are basically the same thing!
Cool! When do we start with this medical procedure?
No, I am saying that if consciousness, sweetness, bitterness were emergent properties then they should affect other things. Same as charge in electron. Charge is a property of electron. That means that an electron affects other things through electromagnetic force it creates around itself. Any property is like this. If consciousness was a separate property than charge, mass, sping, etc. of the brain then it should affect other things too. This effect must be measurable if consciousness is really a property. We, however, only observe the electromagnetic field due to the motion of electrons. That is all. This means that consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain otherwise it should have a distinctive effect.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:16 pm
No, I am saying that if consciousness, sweetness, bitterness were emergent properties then they should affect other things.
They do! Consciousness affects other things!
If you weren't conscious - you wouldn't be affecting me with your words right now!
if you weren't conscious - I wouldn't be typing this sentence.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:16 pm
If consciousness was a separate property .... it should affect other things too. This effect must be measurable if consciousness is really a property.
It is measurable!
Would bahman be talking to me if he weren't conscious? No.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:16 pm
No, I am saying that if consciousness, sweetness, bitterness were emergent properties then they should affect other things.
They do! Consciousness affects other things!
If you weren't conscious - you wouldn't be affecting me with your words right now!
if you weren't conscious - I wouldn't be typing this sentence.
You missed my point. Consciousness does not produce a field like an electron around itself. There is no such thing as the field of consciousness, sweetness, bitterness, etc. Therefore in this sense consciousness, sweetness, etc. cannot affect anything. I am informing you mainly through electromagnetic force and not consciousness.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:04 pm
Great so consciousness is a property which parts of the brain don't have. If the brain has a new property like consciousness then the brain must have an extra measurable effect on its environment. All we observe, however, is mere electromagnetic filed which this is due to moving electrons rather than existence a new property like consciousness.
So what you are saying is that you would be happy to have your brain swapped out for an electromagnetic coil? They are basically the same thing!
Cool! When do we start with this medical procedure?
No, I am saying that if consciousness, sweetness, bitterness were emergent properties then they should affect other things.
Animals have developed an amazing ability to taste sweetness and bitterness. This ability has had enormous effects. It teaches what is good and what is not good to eat. And consciousness has meant that animals have become aware of the world around them causing a multitude of reactions and behaviours.
Seriously what the fuck is wrong with your brain?
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:29 pm
You missed my point. Consciousness does not produce a field like an electron around itself. There is no such thing as the field of consciousness, sweetness, bitterness, etc. Therefore in this sense consciousness, sweetness, etc. cannot affect anything. I am informing you mainly through electromagnetic force and not consciousness.
You are shifting the goalposts! You said that it must be measurable.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:16 pm
This effect must be measurable if consciousness is really a property.
I showed you that it is measurable!
Consciousness is measurable with information.
Would bahman be talking to me if he weren't conscious? No.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:16 pm
If consciousness was a separate property .... it should affect other things too. This effect must be measurable if consciousness is really a property.
It is measurable!
Would bahman be talking to me if he weren't conscious? No.
You cannot possibly prove that I am a conscious being given the fact that I always reply to you. You need a device to prove that I am a conscious being and for that, you need a sensor that can be affected by the field of consciousness. But there cannot be such a device/sensor because there is no field of consciousness.
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:34 pm
You cannot possibly prove that I am a conscious being given the fact that I always reply to you. You need a device to prove that I am a conscious being and for that, you need a sensor that can be affected by the field of consciousness.
Which is why I asked you - if you are insisting that your brain has no such property called "consciousness", when shall we proceed to replace it with a magnetic coil for you?
bahman wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 3:34 pm
But there cannot be such a device/sensor because there is no field of consciousness.
Of course there is such a device/sensor - I am it! The question is: "Is bahman talking to me?"
Through empirical observation the answer is obviously "yes!". I have measured it!
Are you saying that the measurement is wrong? Are you saying that you aren't talking to me and that I am just hallucinating this conversation?
