|
|
|
|
|
by andrewflnr
758 days ago
|
|
Think about what things "cannot be doubted", with all the brain-in-a-vat types of caveats. It's not trying to be a scientific definition. It operates earlier on the epistemological ladder than science can be meaningfully applied, and that might well be the only reasonable place to define consciousness. (I still can't call it a great definition, even if it did perfectly correspond with the concept. Too indirect.) |
|
If consciousness isn't a physical process, then you've lost me again. People have discussed these things for hundreds of years.