![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 5 to 29 of 29. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too, posted by Susan47 on May 31, 2005, at 9:31:29
Well...
I'll try and explain. This will sound a bit strange, but...Imagine a world that is a molecule for molecule duplicate of this world (this is typically dubbed 'twin earth' in the phil. literature). You have a counterpart on twin earth. A molecule for molecule replica of you.
Now... Would it be possible that while that world is an exact physical duplicate of this world, that there be no consciousness??? That even though 'from the outside' or from an objective point of view everything is an exact duplicate of this world - your counterpart still walks around and stares at the computer and laughs etc. But there is 'nobody home'. There is nothing it is like to be your counterpart. Your counterpart has no subjective conscious experiences whatsoever???
Typically people argue over whether it really is possible or not (possibility is an objective matter). But possibility aside, we have to grant that it is conceivable / imaginable.
If that is right then it follows that even if the sciences were complete and we knew everything there is to know about the material / physical world - there would be further facts. Whether something was conscious / whether there was something it is like to be them would be a further fact that is not merely determined by the state of the material world.
So... The point of that is that yes. Id rather not be conscious (in the sense of there being something that it is like to be me). But by keeping my material body functioning in the world IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO ANYBODY ELSE WHETHER I AM CONSCIOUS OR NOT.
So I wouldn't be harming anyone.
And I wouldn't have to hurt anymore.
The perfect solution.:-)
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 15:04:32
Okay. Molecule per molecule replica of this world. Now this is sounding like "What the bleep...." I'll continue later, gotta pick the children up come back later...
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 15:04:32
D'you know, this counterpart thing .. as I'm reading I'm realizing, this sounds like the feeling I get when I look into a mirror.
It's an exact replica, but without the feeling.
Strange.
Is that where this phil. lit. thing comes to haunt us? Is it an ancient human archetype of your image staring back at you?
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 15:04:32
I can't grant that anything is conceivable, because if I did then I would be denying My Own Reality. Can't do that. Can't do that. I can't conceive of another reality taking the place of mine. I can imagine another person Having another reality, but someone I can't conceive of a space for a duplicate world, so then it follows that I can't believe anything is conceivable. I mean, I don't believe in ghosts .. but I believe spirit is tangible .. I feel, from my own experience, I have spirit .. but I can understand someone else's reality may not contain the same feeling of having a spirit .. but somehow, soul means something else to me entirely, soul seems less ephemeral than spirit, it lives forever .. whereas spirit is more believable, because I feel my spirit is turned off when I'm sleeping .. but how can that account for the vivid reality, the soul-feeling in a dream? I awake from dreams absolutely more emotionally involved than I ever am in conscious life. So that's another level of consciousness, one I have limited contact with. I accept that because my dreams exist in my mind, that that is another reality.. one no one can see, not even myself.. yet we've proven it exists .. so much in our life is open to debate, open to deep thinking .. who's got it figured out? Who? I think I need to take some philosophy ... in another lifetime maybe I'll have actual time for something other than experiencing. Sheesh. You still with me, Alexandra, or have I nonsensed the heck out of you yet?
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 15:04:32
YOu said, "Typically people argue over whether it really is possible or not (possibility is an objective matter). But possibility aside, we have to grant that it is conceivable / imaginable.
If that is right then it follows that even if the sciences were complete and we knew everything there is to know about the material / physical world - there would be further facts."
I'm just thinking that if we have to grant that anything or that other realities might be conceivable/imaginable, we have to also concede that we would never know for certain that the sciences were complete .. we'd have to concede that we may never know everything there is to know. Is that what you're saying?
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 15:04:32
So at the end, there, are you saying that if it were necessary for the consciousness to be able to exist only with the unconscious mirror image, you'd rather be that mirror image than the conscious one? So you'd be happy to make that sacrifice?
Posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » alexandra_k, posted by Susan47 on May 31, 2005, at 17:25:25
>we have to also concede that we would never know for certain that the sciences were complete ..
The final / completed science is when every physical event / process / thing is perfectly predicted (and hence explained because explanation is like a retrospective prediction) via laws of nature.
We will probably never get there...
But it is thought to be an abstract characterisation of what we are working towards...>we'd have to concede that we may never know everything there is to know. Is that what you're saying?
But even once the final science is in. Even once we can predict and explain all the physical facts there are still non-physical facts remaining.
'Why is there something that it is like to be me?'
(it is a fact that there is something that it is like to be me)
'Why did my consciousness arise from this particular body?'
(it is a fact that my consciousness is associated with this body)> you'd rather be that mirror image than the conscious one?
Yup. I'd rather be my non-conscious counterpart than conscious me.
I wouldn't consider it a sacrifice.
I didn't ask to be conscious...
I didn't ask to be associated with this body...
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 18:50:43
It's a fact to you that your consciousness is associated with your particular body, but that "fact" might also be part of a grand illusion in the brain of an alien ... a reality we're not aware of perhaps, science outside of science as we know it ... okay that's paranoid, right?
Posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:41
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too, posted by Susan47 on May 31, 2005, at 19:34:54
> It's a fact to you that your consciousness is associated with your particular body, but that "fact" might also be part of a grand illusion in the brain of an alien ...
There are no false facts...
So if it is true that my consciousness is associated with my body then this is a fact.
If it is false that my consciousness is associated with my body then it is a fact that my consciousness is not associated with my body.> a reality we're not aware of perhaps, science outside of science as we know it ... okay that's paranoid, right?
Nope. Thats Descartes evil genius / demon which has been recast in modern form as the brain in a vat hypothesis.
How do you know that evil scientists didn't come into your room last night while you were sleeping...
They cut all your afferent (input) and efferent (output) nerves to your brain...
Removed it from your skull...
Placed your brain in a vat of nutrients to keep it healthy...
And are directly stimulating your brain so that you are having the experiences that you are having now???If it is true then here are some facts:
You don't have a body
(physical fact)
It seems to you that you have a body
(That isn't a physical fact - it is a fact about your experience / consciousness)
You do have a brain
(physical fact)etc.
Actually... Come to think of it... How do you know that you weren't created right NOW. And all of your 'memories' have simply been implanted into your mind by your creator?????
(You might think that other people would notice something odd about all this... But maybe everyone just came into existence right then)
Thats not paranoia
It's philosophy
;-)
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:42
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on May 31, 2005, at 20:19:14
Well, see, let me hypothesize that what we consider "facts" may actually be a limited truth .. it's limited to our perception of reality, isn't it? So I really have trouble with your use of the word "fact" as though it were an unquestionable truth. Right back, way back, when you said it was a fact that your body, what did you say now, I can't recall exactly, something about your body and your consciousness being connected. You can become unconnected if you really want to.
Posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:42
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too, posted by Susan47 on May 31, 2005, at 23:23:06
Hmm. Truth... What is truth anyways?????
Would you believe that you give some philosophers a research grant and they come up with this:'snow is white' is true if and only if snow is white.
Legandary :-)
And of course snow is very rarely white in the first place!
This is the 'disquotational theory of truth' or occasionally the 'deflationary theory of truth'. People haggle over whether it counts as a theory or not...
The idea is that the only candidates for truth or falsity are...
1) thoughts
2) statements / sentences / propositions
Basically the thought / statement goes in quotes so we can have
'I am conscious'
And what makes the thought / statement true or false is whether or not it actually is the case that I am conscious.
It is a fact that I am conscious.
Take anything you like...
A foetus.
An oyster.
An octopus.
A plant.
Is it conscious?
Either it is or it isn't, there is no in between.
(though what you can be conscious of may depend somewhat on what sense organs are attached to your brain etc)
If it is true that it is conscious then that is a fact.
If it is false that it is conscious then it is a fact that it is not conscious.
No inbetween...Of course it is a seperate issue altogether as to how we could ever come to KNOW whether these things are conscious or not...
But even though we can't KNOW whether anyone aside from ourself is conscious - other things either are or are not.> Well, see, let me hypothesize that what we consider "facts" may actually be a limited truth .. it's limited to our perception of reality, isn't it?
So the thought is that the truth maker (what makes the sentence true or false) is objective. I might believe that I have a body...
But if scientists put me in a vat last night
Then I have the false belief that I have a body.
Actually... I do not have a body.> You can become unconnected if you really want to.
Well...
I can close my eyes and pretend my body doesn't exist...
I can divert my attention from it so that I am not aware of it...
But I can't wish it out of existence...
Unfortunately ;-)
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:42
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on June 1, 2005, at 0:24:50
I'd like to err on the side that everything is conscious. Everything has a consciousness, it is a fact. There.
But maybe it isn't.
Maybe nothing outside of myself has consciousness.
Maybe I am the only conscious.
Maybe your existence is only in my conscious ... the existence of the tree over there, that is only in my conscious .. therefore, it has a consciousness, all right ... mine. I am the only true fact I know. And being aware of that .. doesn't make your own consciousness any less a fact .. if it's true ...
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 5:50:42
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by alexandra_k on June 1, 2005, at 0:24:50
You said, "Well...
I can close my eyes and pretend my body doesn't exist...
I can divert my attention from it so that I am not aware of it...
But I can't wish it out of existence...
Unfortunately ;-)"
I say, you can, actually, but it isn't wishing, and I don't believe I ever used that word here, now, if I did I was incorrect because, you see, because it isn't wishing but you certainly can change the "fact" of your body's "existence" .. just as you can make yourself lose your mind.
It's true. But wishing has nothing to do with it. Wishing in itself is a powerless action, it's a silly word, I've always had a real aversion to that word. It's childish, silly, ineffective.
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 8:56:28
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » alexandra_k, posted by Susan47 on June 1, 2005, at 13:23:24
Posted by JenStar on June 2, 2005, at 10:27:14
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too, posted by Susan47 on May 30, 2005, at 20:22:59
Susan,
I think you have a lovely way with words. You should definitely keep writing! Even your posts about sadness & despair often have a beauty to them.I'm glad you're feeling strong & in control. I'm happy for you!
JenStar
Posted by Susan47 on June 2, 2005, at 14:04:43
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » Susan47, posted by JenStar on June 2, 2005, at 10:27:14
Well thank you, darling one ... I'm doing the pits actually, effing lousy really.
Lousy lousy lousy .. I have so many needs and so few of them, it seems, ever actually are met ... by me or anyone else ... sometimes it takes all my energy just not to feel pain. Heavy effing sigh.
Posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 23:36:50
In reply to Re: Just a thought and a change of subject too » alexandra_k, posted by Susan47 on June 1, 2005, at 13:23:24
I didn't know what to say..
Hmm.
How is your day going?
I have to do something to snap out of the place where I am at...
What to do what to do
Hmmmmmm
Posted by Damos on June 3, 2005, at 2:03:07
In reply to Re: Sorry Susan, posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 23:36:50
Caramel macchiato and some cheesecake.
Posted by Susan47 on June 3, 2005, at 16:55:12
In reply to Re: Sorry Susan, posted by alexandra_k on June 2, 2005, at 23:36:50
You didn't know what to say.. now that feels bad, really bad, because I'm thinking, this is me, this is how it always goes with my thinking, there're huge huge holes in it, I never make any sense .. et cetera.
I'm sorry. How's Sunny? I haven't phoned her and I feel like hell for not doing it yet. If she's not okay this is going to be horrible all the way around. Please let Sunny be okay.
Posted by alexandra_k on June 3, 2005, at 17:37:23
In reply to Re: Sorry Susan » alexandra_k, posted by Susan47 on June 3, 2005, at 16:55:12
No Susan sweetie, its not you - its me.
You make a lot of sense.
Too much sense sometimes ;-)
Um... Susan... Do you think you might be able to call Sunny and just tell her that people here are worried about her cause she hasn't posted anything for a bit. Just say that we miss her and wish she would come back.It doesn't have to be for long - but we'd feel a lot better just knowing that she is alive at least.
If not - then thats ok.
Hopefully she will turn up soon :-)
Posted by alexandra_k on June 3, 2005, at 17:38:29
In reply to May I suggest..... » alexandra_k, posted by Damos on June 3, 2005, at 2:03:07
:-)
I went out to dinner with a couple of friends.
Pizza.
Mmm chicken (shame on me!!!)
No cheesecake, but I had coffee.
It helped me feel a little better.
:-)
Posted by Susan47 on June 3, 2005, at 17:54:42
In reply to Re: Sorry Susan, posted by alexandra_k on June 3, 2005, at 17:37:23
So I left a message, she's to call me as soon as she can, no bones about it, Sunny.
She has to call.
Posted by TamaraJ on June 3, 2005, at 18:31:08
In reply to Voice Messaging., posted by Susan47 on June 3, 2005, at 17:54:42
In spite of your own struggles right now, you took the time to check up on a friend who is also struggling.
Posted by alexandra_k on June 3, 2005, at 19:43:53
In reply to Voice Messaging., posted by Susan47 on June 3, 2005, at 17:54:42
:-)
Thanks Susan
Posted by Susan47 on June 4, 2005, at 12:30:21
In reply to Voice Messaging., posted by Susan47 on June 3, 2005, at 17:54:42
She's going to be okay. I just heard something. Keep you posted. Spread the word to the other board, thanks. Talk to you soon.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.