Linx comments on The Generalized Anti-Zombie Principle - Less Wrong

19 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 05 April 2008 11:16PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (64)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Linx 24 May 2012 04:13:18AM 1 point [-]

I'm sorry to comment on such an old post, but I'm really new to rationality and especially bayesianism, and this discussion got me confused about something.

Non-reductionists such as Richard say there is a non-physical "thingy" called a consciousness, and that it is epiphenomenal. That means it has no consequences on the physical world.

Wouldn't this be a model that doesn't anticipate anything, as you described in your first posts? If one argues that conciousness has no effect on the observable world, isn't one arguing that there might not be any conciousness at all? That the whole argument is pointless?