An argument that consciousness is not just brain states w/ Joshua Rasmussen

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ต.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 12

  • @PhilosophyforthePeople
    @PhilosophyforthePeople  2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    Hope to upload more "highlight" videos like this, so let me know what you think of these shorter segments.
    My full original conversation with Dr. Rasmussen is here: th-cam.com/video/rQqp31b83k0/w-d-xo.html

  • @pop3stealth97
    @pop3stealth97 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    loved these glad to see them back 🙏🏾
    now all we need is shorts 😩

    • @PhilosophyforthePeople
      @PhilosophyforthePeople  2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yeah sorry for the interruption. We had someone helping with production but that was only for a short time. I’m super busy with a million other projects so editing videos just isn’t something I can realistically do. However, we other people are now helping again, so hopefully this will become a regular thing again : )
      We’ll see about the shorts. Recommended topics?

  • @markbirmingham6011
    @markbirmingham6011 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Comment for traction. Dr Josh is great

  • @0301aris
    @0301aris 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Rewatching after a long time, i realised something. Theres a dilemma presented to the identity theorist.
    Either we are not directly aware of the brain state, in which case they cant be identical with our mind state, or, if the materialist wants to say that are aware of brain states somehow, then it looks like brain states reduce to mind states rather than mind states reducing to brain states. Either way a materialist identity theory seems to be false.
    Have you encountered any more objections to this Pat?

    • @PhilosophyforthePeople
      @PhilosophyforthePeople  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      It's been a while since I've thought about this argument, but I'm currently reading Moreland's new book on consciousness, where I think he present a similar line of thought. If anything new or interesting pops up, perhaps I'll do a short video on it.

  • @jackolyte
    @jackolyte ปีที่แล้ว

    I don't understand his argument. He says "How can that which you've seen be identical to that which you've not seen?" How is this a contradiction...? Couldn't they possibly be the same, even though you've only seen one and not the other? Why does it necessarily follow that the front is not equal to the back if you aren't able to compare them?

    • @jackolyte
      @jackolyte ปีที่แล้ว

      Oh wait. Is he saying the fact you can see one but not the other implies they must not be the same?

    • @PhilosophyforthePeople
      @PhilosophyforthePeople  ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@jackolyte Right, Josh would clarify that the front of the coin and the back of the coin are part of the same underlying reality, nevertheless really distinct aspects of that single underlying reality.