Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 04:48:27 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Map Makers Admit Mistake in Showing Ice Cap Loss in Greenland  (Read 18304 times)
bb113
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728


View Profile
March 09, 2012, 07:53:41 PM
 #401

No, I am not an expert in paramecium. I can guess how "memory" would work though based off how mammalian cells function.

1480740507
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480740507

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480740507
Reply with quote  #2

1480740507
Report to moderator
1480740507
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480740507

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480740507
Reply with quote  #2

1480740507
Report to moderator
1480740507
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480740507

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480740507
Reply with quote  #2

1480740507
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480740507
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480740507

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480740507
Reply with quote  #2

1480740507
Report to moderator
1480740507
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480740507

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480740507
Reply with quote  #2

1480740507
Report to moderator
bb113
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728


View Profile
March 10, 2012, 01:44:11 AM
 #402

Quote
IN THE LETTER “NEUROSCIENCE AND THE
soul” (27 February, p. 1168), M. J. Farah and
N. Murphy state that eventually neuroscience
and the material system it describes may be
able to explain all facets of being human. This
idea strikes me as a somewhat naïve and simple
faith in scientific progress rather than an
accurate assessment of current thinking on
this issue. Some years ago, the philosopher
David Chalmers referred to the problem of
consciousness (how physical processes in the
brain give rise to subjective experience) as the
“hard problem” (1). We are no closer to knowing
or understanding how this happens today,
so the problem remains hard and should be
acknowledged as hard. In the absence of such
understanding, personal opinions and beliefs
about this question should not be presented as
genuine knowledge.


Haha, the guy who wrote this (it's a letter to Science) is on my dissertation committee. Apparently he is a fan of Chalmer's as well. I definitely agree with the last line.
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
March 10, 2012, 03:42:49 AM
 #403

The first rule about discussing consciousness: Acknowledge that Chalmers is required reading, understand Chalmers' viewpoints, and go from there. Chalmers' work is really important.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 [21]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!