You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

FeepingCreature comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 25, chapter 96 - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: NancyLebovitz 25 July 2013 04:36AM

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

Comments (524)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Velorien 25 July 2013 09:19:47PM 2 points [-]

I think you're missing my point. I'm not saying "reductionism prevents consciousness from existing". I'm saying that:

If consciousness in the Potterverse is the same sort of thing as consciousness in our universe (i.e. a way of describing electrical signals in the brain, and not a magical ineffable substance like a soul)

and

the differences between humans and animals in the Potterverse are same or similar to those in our universe

then

it is impossible for humans in the Potterverse to have consciousness while animals lack it

and

it is impossible to end death for humans but not animals using consciousness as the criterion for distinguishing between the two.

My original reference to reductionism was just to eliminate the possibility of Potterverse consciousness being a magical ineffable substance (in which case this argument would not apply).

Comment author: FeepingCreature 26 July 2013 03:44:11PM *  3 points [-]

I think this comes down to a sloppy definition of consciousness, where what parent possibly meant was self awareness plus symbolic comprehension of death.

Comment author: bogdanb 27 July 2013 08:40:59AM *  3 points [-]

plus symbolic comprehension of death.

Which is clearly pertinent due to how Patronus works. Good catch.