2 ms·
Picked up this book just now... Seems full of red flags. In the first few pages: - Accepts Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" without skepticism - Aims for
by the__alchemist 5y ago
Picked up this book just now... Seems full of red flags. In the first few pages:
- Accepts Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" without skepticism
- Aims for a scientific theory to be "respectable"
- Concludes that because sensory input to a brain seems infeasible using 1990 simulation tech (Not considering advances, using sensors etc), simulating reality to a brain isn't possible; Makes a comparison to a ladder-to-the-moon.
- jiocrag 5y agoHmm... those seem like pretty shallow interpretations of his research. What do you mean by 'accepts Descartes' "I think, therefore I am" without skepticism?'
- the__alchemist 5y agoThey're shallow, but there's such a high density of questionable statements in the first few pages, it's a red flag. I love speculative science and reading about potentially new and/or controversial ideas... but it only makes sense if I can trust the author on more concrete topics. > "I think, therefore I am". Philosophers today are less concerned with proving one's own existence as a thinking thing (perhaps because they have decided that Descartes settled that matter quite satisfactorily)
- jiocrag 5y agoI think you’re misinterpreting. Dennet is setting up to question Descartes’ assumption, which has been “accepted,” but he spends the first 50 or so pages of the book breaking down. I’m not saying this book has all the answers about consciousness (quite the contrary — it has been criticized for not really “explaining consciousness” as the title implies), but I think you would find the studies and observations about how our minds generate “drafts” of reality quite compelling.