6 ms·
I find this interesting, and I think dates should always be included. But I have this question- why am I interested in the date? What changes in this message w
by frxhvcdtgf 2y ago
I find this interesting, and I think dates should always be included.
But I have this question- why am I interested in the date? What changes in this message when I know the date?
I feel like knowing the date sets up a conflict between "this is out of date" vs. "this is before the era of mass garbage generation" (more generously described as "with time only the classics survive)
- mannykannot 2y agoThere has been much debate since this was written, but not much movement towards a consensus.
- cubefox 2y agoChalmers also may have changed his view in the past 28 years.
- robwwilliams 2y agoI wish. This kind of showboating in 1996 is what allowed him to achieve his professional goal—-to be the modern voice of archaic Cartesian dualism. There actual is no hard problem. Ask neuroscientist “What is the hard problem” and you will get blank stares. They just do not know, or like me, do not care. It is a muddy residue of Cartesian dualism. Boring.
- cubefox 2y agoThat's not convincing to me. If you say some problem "doesn't exist", I need an argument which makes a compelling case for that, which presents some kind of dissolution.
- robwwilliams 2y agoRead Daniel Dennett or Richard Rorty—-two philosophers better able than I am able to explain how we inherited this pseudo-problem from Descartes.
- cubefox 2y agoI've read Descartes, he has good arguments, and I know that Chalmers has a higher academic standing than Dennett. So this gives me not a lot of reason to think it's all just a pseudo problem.
- robwwilliams 2y agoHere is a good overview of Dennett: https://aeon.co/essays/as-real-as-it-ever-gets-dennetts-conception-of-the-mind https://aeon.co/essays/as-real-as-it-ever-gets-dennetts-conc...