/sci/ - Science & Math

>>4599063
lol

>>4599057
>The thinker.
So this is a thought
"I am thinking my thoughts" is itself a thought.
What is the structure of thought? I think thought is mechanical.

>>4599059
How could any data answer this questioin?
Who is going to interpret the data?

>>4599051
Ok so what is the 'me'. Is it the thinker of thoughts or is it thought itself?

>When 'I' read a book, what is the 'I', the thinker of thoughts or thought itself.

>>4599036
No I mean you just have such a scientific view of 'ordinary matter' that it surprises you when you find out that the taste of chocolate exists in the universe, when you yourself are a taster of chocolate.
>eats chocolate all his life
>learns about materialism
>OMG how can this be the taste of choclate exists OMFG 'ordinary matter OMG amazing amazing
Meanwhile I eat your chocolate then fuck your cockhole with a spoon

>>4599027
So what is the thing which reads?
When 'I' read a book, what is the 'I', the thinker of thoughts or thought itself.

>>4599025
>I'm increasingly more baffled that you had the fucking balls to accuse *me* of not knowing what I'm talking about, by the way.
Hahah ok bro what are you a fucking prince

>>4599021
You are such an idiot OMG
You as a taster of chocolate are amazed to find out that tasting chocolate exists?
OMG guys check this shit out matter when properly organized makes this thing called 'taste'.
Woopty shit fuckhead I've tasted all my fucking life.
But cockfucker! the taste of chocolate dudddde, the fucking taste of chcoclate from ordinary matter how amazing!!!111
wow, man, just wow.

>>4599009
> but believe they are a currently as-yet not fully understood property of perfectly ordinary matter
So this is what I'm questioning. What is the thing which does the understanding?
Is it thought or the thinker?

>>4599014
>the existence of said experiences altogether.
What is wrong with you? Everyone except you and dennet uses 'qualia' to mean the above. That is, 'qualia' is pretty much synonymous with subjective experience, experience, subjective phenomenology.
No dualistics connotations, nothing to do with attacking physicalism, your attacking a complete strawman.

>>4599008
You have no idea what you are talking about and have read far to much dennet

>>4598997
How can you deny qualia?
What colours are you seeing right now?

>>4598988
what has dualism and qualia have to do with this thread.
God you guys are fucking morons.

>>4598967
It's a legitimate question.
What the hell does 'biological self' mean?

>>4598964
>>4598964
I don't think you get it.
Who is going to do the tests? Who is going to comprehend the results?

>>4598951
> The biological self
And so what does this mean?
What is the 'biological self', but a thought?

>>4598933
> You can't choose whether your brain takes another one's perspective
I don't know what you are talking about?

>>4598932
> The jolt of electricity travelling from one side of your brain to the other
BTW this is like saying sight is a lightwave travelling from the object to my eye.

>>4598932
>Conciousness is just your current thoughts
So this is what I am questioning.
"consciousness is my current thoughts" is itself a thought. Do you see what I'm saying, the subject or the 'I' is an object of thought masquerading as a subject. And if the subject is a confused object of thought then the 'other' with whom the self converses is no less mythological than 'I', the 'Me' or the speaker.

>>4598922
To whom is the self obedient?

>>4598924
yeah your implying thoughts somehow exist as a ghost in the machine or something.
Your the one who implied there was a location of consciousness

>>4598915
so thoughts are some sort of ghost in electrical impulses

>>4598903
>>4598903
>but the fact that you have a self shows you don't belong exclusively to your self.
So this makes no sense