Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |  [ show all ]
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24668962 -

Peyote Road said:
So you're saying someone can't dream something up that they don't like and not even realize it's a dream? That only happens to me most nights of the week.


Peyote Road said:
sudly said:
People can dream up amazing dreams and scenarios like nothing else I've seen on earth, at least in my experience of them. The tragedies, the lust, the dreamous joy is a beautiful thing, I think we've all had it. Mine has been in many a thousand form.


I didn't respond to this because I wasn't sure if it was even supposed to be a rebuttal or just a musing.


Were you suggesting I didn't believe in nightmares or sleep paralysis?
I mean I've dreamt about things that were real experiences but the dreams I've had in of themselves didn't make those events within the dreams real within the waken world of my own conscious experience.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24668985 -

Peyote Road said:
teknix said:
Show an adult cat a mirror and it will always think it is another cat. (Unless we change it's DNA or it evolves sentience)

The same is not true with a baby, it will grow to know that it is itself, when that occurs doesn't really matter.

Bad analogy.


Not true. I have a mirror on top of my dresser and my cat jumps on the dresser and walks around in front of the mirror and has never reacted to her reflection as though it were another cat. I have had dogs also in a house with a full length door mirror. They never once barked at the mirror or gave any indication of thinking it was another dog. On the other hand if my cat sees another cat through a window, she immediately becomes very interested. Same with dogs, if they see a dog outside through a window, they bark.



Fallacy of composition. (specific to general)

They probably gave up trying to get it.

There has been many experiments that observe the opposite of what you claim. Just look on youtube at all these silly cats!










Sure they lose interest eventually . . . .

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24668990 -

In contrast:

Elephant:





Dolphin:



etc.....

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: teknix]
    #24669000 -

teknix said:
A cat might think, "ouch, that hurt", but it wouldn't think "ouch, that hurt me" for example.


your interpretation of "sentient" is too human-cutural
we humans tend to yelp, so do dogs, cats may hiss when suddenly pained. An alien might radiate light or might translate through dimensions when pained, the response to stimulus is a good indication that something is potentially sentient, but it may be hiding or hunting and failing to respond as expected for a deeper purpose, and deeper purposes are assuredly related to sentience in some way.


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: redgreenvines]
    #24669010 -

The interpretation is intended to be decisive and inclusive, and not an arbitrary definition.

Sentience needs to make a clear distinction between perceptual differences between animals, not to include all animals.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: teknix]
    #24669030 -

Quote:
Show an adult cat a mirror and it will always think it is another cat. (Unless we change it's DNA or it evolves sentience)

The same is not true with a baby, it will grow to know that it is itself, when that occurs doesn't really matter.

Bad analogy.


Not true. I have a mirror on top of my dresser and my cat jumps on the dresser and walks around in front of the mirror and has never reacted to her reflection as though it were another cat. I have had dogs also in a house with a full length door mirror. They never once barked at the mirror or gave any indication of thinking it was another dog. On the other hand if my cat sees another cat through a window, she immediately becomes very interested. Same with dogs, if they see a dog outside through a window, they bark.



Fallacy of composition. (specific to general)

They probably gave up trying to get it.

There has been many experiments that observe the opposite of what you claim. Just look on youtube at all these silly cats!




I did not make the fallacy of composition. I never claimed that no cats ever mistake their reflection for another cat. What you said was "Show an adult cat a mirror and it will always think it is another cat."

That's what I was responding to. It only takes one counter example to disprove always and my cat shows no indication of thinking her reflection is another cat. Is it possible she thought it was and first and then lost interest? Sure. But imagine if you had never seen a mirror before. It would be perfectly natural to be fascinated with it at first and as I pointed out, even human beings are capable of mistaking their own reflection for another person at first.

The fact that she lost interest so fast only points toward intelligence, perhaps she realizes there is no other cat there even if she doesn't understand it's her own reflection that she sees. Either way, she is smart enough to ignore it.  I noticed you ignored my question about the window, which she never lost interest in, even though she cannot get at the cats she sees out the window either. For some reason, cats in the window are interesting to her while the mirror is not.

The same is true of all the dogs I've had even the ones I got as young puppies. I don't recall any of them ever barking at the mirror but it's impossible to get them not to bark at dogs they see out the window even to this day. Somehow they learn the mirror isn't real, perhaps because it doesn't smell like another dog.


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24669037 -

Counter claims aren't counter evidence.

Perhaps ALWAYS shouldn't have been used, good point there.

I also went on to elaborate that it would eventually lose interest, so that could infer initially.

I would bet if you took it to a gym with a full sized mirror, it would do the same thing.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24669064 -

Peyote Road said:
If you read the definition of sentient, it doesn't specify anything about the organism needing to be fully developed.




The point is that they aren't comparable due to developmental factors. A newborn baby is not sentient.

Peyote Road said:
Why do you still appear to be confusing sentience with self awareness? A creature does need to recognize itself in a mirror in order to be sentient. I pointed this out in my first response to you.


I'm arguing that self-awareness is required for sentience. Rather than or, it's and.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: teknix]
    #24669114 -

Quote:
Counter claims aren't counter evidence.

Perhaps ALWAYS shouldn't have been used, good point there.

I also went on to elaborate that it would eventually lose interest, so that could infer initially.


Well, what you said was:

Quote:
Show an adult cat a mirror and it will always think it is another cat. (Unless we change it's DNA or it evolves sentience)


That is the claim I was disputing. Later, in your next post after I had already responded you elaborated that it would eventually lose interest. I

Quote:
I would bet if you took it to a gym with a full sized mirror, it would do the same thing.




That would be an interesting experiment but I am not sure what it would prove. I acknowledge mirrors can fool animals for a little while until they lose interest/realize its not real. I was aware before this thread cats and dogs couldn't pass the mirror test as in actually come to understand that what they see in the mirror is their own reflection.

I guess the only unresolved questions are the question I raised about my puppies not responding to the mirror. In other words, do all cats and dogs react to a mirror as if there is another dog or cat there at first or do some simply not react much to a mirror at all? And can they remember the mirror as in if you bring animals to new locations with mirrors will they react less each time as they remember being the mirror effect?

I would hypothesize that some animals simply don't pay much attention to the mirror animal possibly because it doesn't smell like a dog/cat. My dogs never responded to the TV either. If they hear barking they might perk up for a moment but they never respond to images on the TV screen.

To the second question i would hypothesize yes.


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Edited by Peyote Road (09/29/17 07:44 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: teknix]
    #24669126 -

don't be too arbitrary in your distinctions, maybe revisit your motivation for this idea, start a new thread perhaps.


--------------------
:brainfart: _ :finger:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: redgreenvines]
    #24669164 -

Good idea.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: teknix] * 1
    #24669199 -




The point is that they aren't comparable due to developmental factors. A newborn baby is not sentient.


Based on what? I've never heard anyone claim that a newborn isn't sentient. It seems like you've made up your own definition of sentient and are pitting it against the dictionary for reasons that remain unclear to me.

Peyote Road said:
I'm arguing that self-awareness is required for sentience. Rather than or, it's and.


But according to the definition of sentience, it isn't. You have been given two formal definitions of sentience in this thread, one posted by me and the other by Sudly and neither one requires self-awareness.

In fact the definition Sudly posted clearly implies that an organism can be sentient without self awareness.

Quote:
Sentience is the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.

In the philosophy of consciousness, sentience can refer to the ability of any entity to have subjective perceptual experiences, or as some philosophers refer to them, "qualia". This is distinct from other aspects of the mind and consciousness, such as creativity, intelligence, sapience, self-awareness, and intentionality (the ability to have thoughts about something). Sentience is a minimalistic way of defining consciousness, which otherwise commonly collectively describes sentience plus other characteristics of the mind.


So how can you argue something requires something when the very definition of the word in question says that it doesn't? I mean it seems like shooting yourself in the foot. It's doomed to failure.

It would be one thing if you had claimed Sudly and I got our definitions from out of date/non trustworthy sources and you provided a better one but you didn't even do that. You just argued directly against the established definition which you did not challenge.


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Edited by Peyote Road (09/29/17 08:18 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24669219 -

red is right, this makes more sense:

https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/24669213

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: teknix]
    #24669715 -



sudly said:
Even if all animals were sentient, would that not make humans something more, or at least something different?

Quote:
I'm not sure I understand your question. From a spiritual/religious perspective, human beings are generally considered the highest form of life on earth. In Buddhism for example, being born a human is considered very auspicious because it presents a unique opportunity  to come to understand the Dharma. A giraffe for instance, is far less likely to take an interest in studying the Dharma because giraffes lack the capacity for self consciousness that humans possess. A giraffe might be able to consciously reflect on things like eating leaves, changing seasons or caring for its young but it would be highly unlikely for a giraffe to reflect on itself reflecting on itself caring for its young (thinking about its own reaction to that experience, as opposed to just thinking about the experience or asking itself why it wants to care for its young or why the seasons change).

A human being on the other hand, is easily capable of that kind of reflection. We can think about ourselves thinking about ourselves thinking about ourselves. This ability to make ourselves into an object of reflection and then ask why questions separates us from all other animals. Dolphins and whales may have some similar abilities of reflection, we don't know for sure. However, they lack the ability to mold the physical universe in accordance with their minds. So man is unique not only in his ability to understand himself, but he also has the ability to understand and shape the world he lives in. This is what elevates man to the level of the gods. Man is part animal, part spirit. The Bible says he was a created a little lower than the angels. From the Christian standpoint, man is said to reflect the image of God in the sense that he has dominion over creation including all the lower animals, and he has the ability to create using his imagination and understanding. These are god like qualities.


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24676225 -

sudly said:
Even if all animals were sentient, would that not make humans something more, or at least something different?
Peyote Road said:
I'm not sure I understand your question. From a spiritual/religious perspective, human beings are generally considered the highest form of life on earth. In Buddhism for example, being born a human is considered very auspicious because it presents a unique opportunity  to come to understand the Dharma. A giraffe for instance, is far less likely to take an interest in studying the Dharma because giraffes lack the capacity for self consciousness that humans possess. A giraffe might be able to consciously reflect on things like eating leaves, changing seasons or caring for its young but it would be highly unlikely for a giraffe to reflect on itself reflecting on itself caring for its young (thinking about its own reaction to that experience, as opposed to just thinking about the experience or asking itself why it wants to care for its young or why the seasons change).

A human being on the other hand, is easily capable of that kind of reflection. We can think about ourselves thinking about ourselves thinking about ourselves. This ability to make ourselves into an object of reflection and then ask why questions separates us from all other animals. Dolphins and whales may have some similar abilities of reflection, we don't know for sure. However, they lack the ability to mold the physical universe in accordance with their minds. So man is unique not only in his ability to understand himself, but he also has the ability to understand and shape the world he lives in. This is what elevates man to the level of the gods. Man is part animal, part spirit. The Bible says he was a created a little lower than the angels. From the Christian standpoint, man is said to reflect the image of God in the sense that he has dominion over creation including all the lower animals, and he has the ability to create using his imagination and understanding. These are god like qualities.





According to the definition I gave sentience doesn't involve or is distinct from creativity, intelligence, sapience, self awareness and intentionality. So even if you cat is sentient that isn't saying much, if anything.
Quote:
In the philosophy of consciousness, sentience can refer to the ability of any entity to have subjective perceptual experiences, or as some philosophers refer to them, "qualia". This is distinct from other aspects of the mind and consciousness, such as creativity, intelligence, sapience, self-awareness, and intentionality (the ability to have thoughts about something).



Also not sure how this definition of 'sentience' makes sense with a subjective sense.
Quote:
Sentience is the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively.


The other one says it isn't related to self-awareness.. these definitions we've used seem to have difficulty in contrasting well. Because it's sounding to me like these definitions are suggesting that sentience is a mere ability to have sensation, without an awareness of an experience of them.

Also, what's your definition of the Dharma?


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: sudly]
    #24676287 -

Where is the difficulty? The basic concept of sentience is that beings that can feel pain and distress are considered sentient and deserve compassion and respect. Contrast this with a machine for example. The machine I use at work doesn't get a break, it doesn't get paid, it doesn't get the option to stop working there. It's basically a slave. Why do we not object to this? It's because we don't consider it sentient. We just had a 4 page debate over this in the other thread. It was so time consuming I didn't get a chance to respond to your other post in this thread, which I will try to get to in the next few days.


In Hinduism, dharma signifies behaviours that are considered to be in accord with rta, the order that makes life and universe possible,[10][note 1] and includes duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and β€˜β€˜right way of living’’.[7] In Buddhism dharma means "cosmic law and order",[10] but is also applied to the teachings of the Buddha.[10]


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Edited by Peyote Road (10/01/17 07:05 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24676330 -

Well, for something to have sentience and to have a subjective sense, I don't see how it can be missing self-awareness, because without it I don't see there as being a subjective sense, only a perception of the senses which are physical experiences.

It sounds like there's a lack of interoception. 

Also I see that machines are powered differently to say a cat, and that the work they do is not something stressful, otherwise they would break and have one poor design.

I don't buy the whole concept of karma, it's kinda silly to think the universe owes one anything in my view, though I do appreciate that luck has a role to play and that we should do what we can to have it on our side, be that through a friendly, encouraging and resilient demeanor.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: sudly]
    #24676345 -

sudly said:
Well, for something to have sentience and to have a subjective sense, I don't see how it can be missing self-awareness, because without it I don't see there as being a subjective sense, only a perception of the senses which are physical experiences.


What do you mean by physical experiences? You don't know if a dog feels pain in the same way you do or sees colors the way you do, therefore it's subjective.

Secondly, you yourself have experiences without being self aware. You're not self aware all the time. What do you call those experiences, if not subjective? Are you saying when you forget yourself, you've having an objective experience?

Quote:
It sounds like there's a lack of interoception. 

Also I see that machines are powered differently to say a cat, and that the work they do is not something stressful, otherwise they would break and have one poor design.


What are you talking about? Machines do break and the work they do does put stress on them (or else they would;'t break).


Quote:
I don't buy the whole concept of karma, it's kinda silly to think the universe owes one anything in my view, though I do appreciate that luck has a role to play and that we should do what we can to have it on our side, be that through a friendly, encouraging and resilient demeanor.


I didn't say anything about karma nor is karma the belief that the universe owes you something.


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Edited by Peyote Road (10/01/17 07:42 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: Peyote Road]
    #24676367 -

I know a dog doesn't see colour in the same way as I do though it's pretty obvious they feel physical sensations in the same way we do with having a nervous system and all.

Quote:
Humans see the world in color because we (usually) have three types of color receptor cells, or cones, in our eyes. These are sensitive individually to red, green, and blue light, and the different intensities and proportions of those three colors as seen by our eyes are put together by the brain to create the full-color world as we know it.

Some humans, however, are colorblind, which is a generic term for various changes in color perception, depending upon which of the receptors are defective. Two of the more common types are red-green and blue-yellow, in which a person cannot distinguish the two colors named.

For dogs, their color vision is most similar to a human with red-green color blindness, although there are other differences. Dogs are less sensitive to variations in gray shades than humans are, as well as only about half as sensitive to changes in brightness.



So, the next time your dog can’t find the red ball that you just threw onto a green lawn, remember that their world, while still full of vivid blues and yellows, is probably a bit less colorful than your own. But don’t feel sorry for dogs because of this. What they lack in visual ability, they make up for in sense of smell. Their noses have been estimated to be up to 100 million times more sensitive than yours. Their eyesight may be limited, but they can smell in 3D, IMAX, and TechnicolorTM.

https://www.cesarsway.com/dog-care/innocuous-behaviors/through-a-dogs-eyes


Since when am I not self-aware? Maybe as a baby, and forgetting myself? My memories aren't perfect and I would call the memories I have of my physical experiences subjective, but not the actual physical experiences themselves.

Without self-awareness how does one interospect?
Quote:
Interoception is a relatively unheard of sensory system. It is the sense responsible for detecting internal regulation responses, such as respiration, hunger, heart rate, and the need for digestive elimination.


Why does a machine deserve compassion and respect? I mean heck I love that I can have an electric screwdriver but it does what it is designed to do.

You talked about Dharma and Rta for who knows what reason..
Quote:
Peyote Road said: In Hinduism, dharma signifies behaviours that are considered to be in accord with rta, the order that makes life and universe possible, and includes duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and β€˜β€˜right way of living’’. In Buddhism dharma means "cosmic law and order", but is also applied to the teachings of the Buddha.


Quote:
Ṛta is described as that which is ultimately responsible for the proper functioning of the natural, moral and sacrificial orders. Conceptually, it is closely allied to the injunctions and ordinances thought to uphold it, collectively referred to as Dharma, and the action of the individual in relation to those ordinances, referred to as Karma



--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Have the Materialists been defeated on PS&P? [Re: sudly]
    #24676427 -

Quote:
I know a dog doesn't see colour in the same way as I do though it's pretty obvious they feel physical sensations in the same way we do with having a nervous system and all.


If they don't see color the same way, how do you know they feel physical sensations the same way? If you break your leg, you feel pain but you don't know that your subjective experience of the pain is the same as mine is if I break my leg. All we know is that we both find the sensation unpleasant, not that we share the exact same experience of the sensation. That is what is meant by subjective. How do you not understand that?

Even two non color blind humans might not experience colors exactly the same way. Even the same human, I for example, see colors slightly differently though my left eye vs my right eye. Hence the experience is subjective. We don't know for sure what it is like for other people or animals. This is not a difficult concept.


Quote:
Since when am I not self-aware? Maybe as a baby, and forgetting myself? My memories aren't perfect and I would call the memories I have of my physical experiences subjective, but not the actual physical experiences themselves.


You still haven't explained what you mean by physical experiences. In addition, why wouldn't you consider physical experiences subjective? You can't know that other beings experience them in the same way you do, hence they are subjective.

Without self-awareness how does one interospect?

Quote:
Interoception is a relatively unheard of sensory system. It is the sense responsible for detecting internal regulation responses, such as respiration, hunger, heart rate, and the need for digestive elimination.



Is the body not a physical thing? Look, you're just horribly unclear. What exactly are you trying to say? You don't explain what you mean by physical experiences or self awareness. Just explain what you're trying to say, clearly.


--------------------
The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* The S&P Forum's music picks v2.0
( 1 2 3 all )		 Adamist 5,030 41 07/16/03 11:38 PM
by fuzzhead
* There isn't intelligent life out there reason 2
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 Dogomush 10,205 141 09/07/09 10:46 AM
by sandman3698
* Intelligence SpecialEd 2,395 16 05/23/04 04:05 AM
by redgreenvines
* M.I. (Mushroom Intelligence) (now with cool new pictures)
( 1 2 all )		 dmtrypr 4,251 33 11/27/04 03:13 AM
by fresh313
* I believe in E.S.P.
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 3,258 30 06/14/03 08:09 PM
by somebodyelse
* Will the forces of Good ultimately defeat the forces of Evil recalcitrant 1,904 16 03/15/03 07:50 AM
by quemo
* How can humans deem themselves as "intelligent life".. ekomstop 1,299 15 09/23/04 05:29 PM
by Droz
* from a scientific materialist perspective, can life have real meaning? Deviate 1,474 18 09/06/05 08:32 AM
by crunchytoast

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,954 topic views. 1 members, 35 guests and 119 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.