DanArmak comments on Dennett's "Consciousness Explained": Prelude - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (97)
I think Dennett is more into showing that the naive view of consciousness is inconsistent and that "being conscious" is not a legit property of things.
What does that mean?
I meant that perhaps consciousness cannot be consistently and meaningfully defined as a property of things, so as to enable us to say: a man is conscious, a rock is not.
What is consciousness, anyway? It comes to something when we need a whole book (Consciousness Explained) to tell us what a word means, instead of a simple definition. And even then we don't agree. I certainly sympathize with those who'd prefer to abolish the whole idea of consciousness, instead.