It appears that you can only tolerate 'panpsychism lite'.
lol, it appears you can only tolerate strawpanpsychism!
Stick to the science and not what I can/cannot tolerate.
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
It appears that you can only tolerate 'panpsychism lite'.
lol, it appears you can only tolerate strawpanpsychism!
Stick to the science and not what I can/cannot tolerate.
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
BTW. here is an example of your shoddy and partial reading of the source. DIRECTLY before the section you quoted is this:
Panpsychism doesn’t necessarily imply that every inanimate object is conscious. “Panpsychists usually don’t take tables and other artifacts to be conscious as a whole,” writes Hedda Hassel Mørch, a philosophy researcher at New York University’s Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, in an email
but nooo you cannot have that. so you seek out the view you like to bash in the article and proceed to bash it, even though it wasn't the point of the article which I brought up.
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
no @Cofty, I read the article and found it interesting. I promote one of the views (which I consider more serious) in the article as worthy of consideration by ppl who are genuinely interested in the subject.
you, being desperate to throw out your favorite tagline ("tables are not conscious") ignore the science I refer to (from the article) and jump directly to the single line (NOT related to the science I brought up) and throw that around like it is some great accomplishment on your part.
Care to discuss integrated information theory or not?
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
@cofty: yah I cite the neuroscientist, you cite a philosopher, after bashing philosophers lol.I hope you appreciate the irony LMAO
good luck with your straw man, just don't complain when a creationist attack Darwins ideas about evolution...
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
@cofty: Your right Tononi suggests that IIT lends credence to panpsychism but the quote you just posted says the exact opposite of the conclusion you came to that 'rocks and humans are fundamentally different in terms of consciousness'.
this makes no damn sense. Rocks and humans are fundamentally different (fundamentally different: fundamentally different in terms of Phi) because one has a brain and the other does not, something which is fundamental to Professor Tononis theory.
Are you seriously suggesting that according to his theory a rock and a human are the same in terms of consciousness?
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
@cofty: Actually panpsychism posits that any aggregate - humans or chairs - is conscious in exactly the same way.
Not true. read the article dammit. the entire point of stuff like integrated information is to distinguish conscious systems from those that are not in a scientific manner.
It is nothing but desperation on the part of a few philosophers
proof you didn't read the article which cite neuroscientists...
you are stuck discussing a straw version of the idea. either educate yourself a bit or admit you are not really interested in learning something new...
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
I have read the article and there is no connection. Stop bullshitting.
integrated information theory is a form of panpsychism AARGHHHGGHHGG!!!! From the article you supposedly read:
One of the most popular and credible contemporary neuroscience theories on consciousness, Giulio Tononi’s Integrated Information Theory, further lends credence to panpsychism. Tononi argues that something will have a form of “consciousness” if the information contained within the structure is sufficiently “integrated,” or unified, and so the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Because it applies to all structures—not just the human brain—Integrated Information Theory shares the panpsychist view that physical matter has innate conscious experience.
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
@cofty: Rocks are not conscious
the point of something like integrated information theory and modern views of panpsychism is exactly to make it clear why rocks and humans are fundamentally different in terms of consciousness. you do get that basic point right?
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
@Cofty: if you had read the article you would know it so why don't you start there?
so i have started down the path of trying to understand evolution, and to get the linear lies that the jws planted in my head out of it.
i bought an audiobook called "evolution: what the fossils say and why it matters" by donald prothero.
i heard it recommended on an atheist podcast that i listened to.
Where can I read about your view of consciousness which is far superior than panpsychism?