• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

The How and Why Of Self-Consciousness "Sticky Please"

Status
Not open for further replies.
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
Gotta get back to work....

Welcome to philosophy!!!

:eek:

Deep deep waters! If you're truly interested, you'll study how to best present your thoughts! I appreciate the vigor you have shown. Grow some thick skin, you'll need it if you plan on doing philosophy on a public forum.
 
arg-fallbackName="*SD*"/>
creativesoul said:
The topic, if it is consciousness, is a very popular one at the moment in both science and philosophy circles.

I suggest rewriting the post into a more story-like format as compared to the enumerated statement look. Arguments typically have a primary premiss, a secondary premiss, and a valid conclusion. I do not see that anywhere. Calling that OP an argument is a mistake. It's not.

I have to say that the presentation of the ideas detracted from them.
Click to expand...

Correct, thank you.
 
arg-fallbackName="*SD*"/>
This can also be termed "Major" and "Minor" (and then hopefully the conclusion follows lest it be invalid) - there is never a need for such gibberish as per the OP.
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
*SD* said:
Constructive criticism was indeed provided. And of course, not well received by the OP.

I'm not going to allow another thread to turn into a dumpster fire just because some people might find it entertaining. If you want a more detailed breakdown, here we go -

Joining a large internet forum and making your OP nothing more than a list of disjointed premises is not the best of moves. Far better to say "Hi, I have this written down and I want to see what the members here make of it"

That didn't happen. Instead we get a laundry list of disjointed, misspelled gibberish. No formal argument ever needs 30 something premises. There are also, at my count, 11 missing premises (if that's what they're even supposed to be) suggesting this is a poor attempt at copy/paste. Who writes like this? The mild suggestion was met with hostility and the OP has a generally antagonistic demeanor so they are in timeout for a short period. This not a ban, the timeout will lift at the appropriate hour.
Click to expand...
Yup. Was a weird way to present a bunch of statements.
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
Looks to be genuinely interested although NEW to the subject and arena at large. Perhaps that explains the presentation?
 
arg-fallbackName="*SD*"/>
Here's what a valid argument looks like OP - (This is in MP format)

P1 - If X then Y
P2 = X
C - Therefore Y

P1 - If this then that
P2 - This
C - Therefore that

Not 30 odd disconnected gibberating malformed sentences.
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
As best I can see, the OP looks to be attempting to set out something like necessary and sufficient conditions for consciousness. Or perhaps, something like elemental constituents thereof.
 
arg-fallbackName="We are Borg"/>
If you post and see that the post is not showing correctly try to fix it, if you cant ask a admin for help.
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
*SD* said:
Here's what a valid argument looks like OP - (This is in MP format)

P1 - If X then Y
P2 = X
C - Therefore Y

P1 - If this then that
P2 - This
C - Therefore that

Not 30 odd disconnected gibberating malformed sentences.
Click to expand...
Yes. It's clear that the OP is not talking about the same thing when using the term "argument".
 
arg-fallbackName="*SD*"/>
creativesoul said:
As best I can see, the OP looks to be attempting to set out something like necessary and sufficient conditions for consciousness. Or perhaps, something like elemental constituents thereof.
Click to expand...

Perhaps so, but a massively flunked/failed attempt at it.
 
arg-fallbackName="*SD*"/>
creativesoul said:
Yes. It's clear that the OP is not talking about the same thing when using the term "argument".
Click to expand...

I have no objection to informal (natural language) arguments, none whatsoever. Arguments are almost always presented informally. However, the OP posted over 30, numbered statements, suggesting he thinks this is a formal argument. It isn't. By any standard. He then went on to attack my character by asserting that I don't know what validity means. Clearly, I do and he doesn't. I don't think he would know a valid argument if one bit him on the ass. Best not to even venture into soundness at this point, it'll just confuse him even more.
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
Looks like he may be interested in the links between physiological sensory perception and consciousness. Perhaps they'll calm down and return. Hopefully to a more welcoming and helpful bunch...

;)
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
Well, it could always be a sticky of how not to write an OP!

The OP seems very new to the subject, eager and a bit over confident. Weren't we all at one time? The admin seemed to just want to take the piss and vinegar out of 'em...

Shame is, the OP at least had some decent ideas rolling around in their head. Could've used a bit of help organizing them. The topic is interesting and en vogue...
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
A Higher Enlightenment said:
It is indeed a fine example of how to apply logical thinking and deductive reasoning skills
Click to expand...
But it is really not. I'm in your corner here, but dude... trust me when I tell you that you could use a bit of studying on logical arguments, fallacious reasoning(formal and informal), and just the basic terms philosophers use regularly, because the way you've used some of them confused me as well as others who've been doing this a long time.

Don't take anything too personally. I'm sure admin would help, if it looked like you truly wanted it.
 
arg-fallbackName="creativesoul"/>
A Higher Enlightenment said:
  1. ​

  2. Are the elements of life and consciousness misconstrued by humans?​

  3. Alternatively, have I written yet another ridiculous and pointless conception of life and consciousness, exactly like countless others who came before me.​

  4. ​

  5. Existence is merely a materialistic concept that simply is; it does not imply that something is alive.​

  6. But in order for life to exist, something must exist.​

  7. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________​


  8. At its heart, consciousness depends on having a life and being awake; these are prerequisites for consciousness to exist.​

  9. Life is necessary for sleep to occur, whereas life and cognition are absolutely essential for dreaming.​

  10. Life and knowledge of life's experiences are prerequisites for thought to take place.​

  11. For you to have any experiences, at least one of the following conditions must have been met before birth. These conditions are commonly known as five senses are Touch, sight, hearing, smell, and taste. Only under these circumstances is anything experience-able.​

  12. It is merely because of at least one of these senses, you can experience things and are therefore aware of them as a result.​

  13. A fantastic illustration of this, is someone who is blind and deaf being aware of holding something. Even though they can't fully comprehend what it is.​

  14. They can still properly structure their perceptions using the other senses. Moreover, as a result, now have an experience and are able to construct thoughts based on this experience.​

  15. ​

  16. In light of this, we can say that if none of these prerequisites are met before the moment when you are born. Then you are unable to experience anything, and as a​

  17. consequence of this you are also unable to have any thoughts. So if you have never had experiences and are unable construct thoughts how could you dream?​

  18. For example if one was born with no Touch, Taste, Sight, Hearing, or Smell, how could they be aware/conscious of anything?​

  19. How could they be aware of this; if a ball was placed in their hands?​

  20. The answer to this is they can not. And as a direct result of this they surely could not dream about it.​

  21. They would not be conscious, only alive.​


  22. But, let us give them one sense in this argument; let us allow the sense of touch once more.​

  23. Now if a ball were placed in their hands, they would still lack any knowledge of what it is. However, they can be conscious of this and aware of themselves touching it.​

  24. They can now construct thoughts of this experience. So thoughts can reimagine this feeling, and surely one could dream of this feeling and experience too.​

  25. If we were to take this ball away, the person once holding this would be aware of its absence, this might invoke emotion in the form of sadness or anger.​

  26. One could continue to dream of the experience of having the ball. So let us allow this person to dream of this.​

  27. Out side of this dream they are conscious they don't have the ball any more as they are already aware of its absence based on past experiences.​

  28. So they could be aware of the difference from dreams and being awake, even if they don't quite understand.​

  29. ​

  30. ​

  31. In conclusion, the absence of basic biological sense, would make it impossible to distinguish between being awake and asleep, if you can't be aware that you were once asleep. Instead, you will merely swap between cycles automatically.​

  32. And there would be no way to be conscious of anything if you don't have any thoughts or experiences.​

  33. It is as a result of these circumstances and the necessity of at least one of them.​

  34. That I've come to a conclusion on what self-consciousness is.​

  35. There are several prerequisites, including existence, living, being awake, and conscious, that are without a doubt necessary conditions for being self-conscious.​

  36. ​

  37. Self- Consciousness​

  38. We are Self-Conscious because, we are cognizant of the fact that we Exist, that we are alive, awake and we​
Click to expand...

Hey there Higher!

So, I'm just wondering what - exactly - you were hoping to achieve with the opening post?("OP" henceforth)


Would I be somewhat accurate if I were to say that so far the replies have showed little to no good understanding of what you were trying to say?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top