NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

Like Feynman infers in the interview I posted, it's not that the questions are bad questions. They can be excellent questions. However unless we have a clearer understanding of the different contexts that I ( and the article ) are talking about, we can find ourselves answering "why" type questions with "how" type answers, and the result will either be a dead-end or make no sense. This is the point I've been trying to get across.

I'll have to get to that later ( assuming you're genuinely interested ). Sometimes I get the feeling we're just trading points and counterpoints without actually applying the process to the problem.

No problem.

I am sure from an evolutionary perspective that it's completely safe to assume consciousness must be beneficial, at least in the manner we've already discussed, not simply just because we have it, but because of the functions mentioned. Whether or not some other system could perform the same functions non-consciously is beside the point, because the functions are beneficial either way. That however doesn't mean consciousness doesn't have limitations.

<blockquote data-quote="Randall" data-source="post: 281763" data-attributes="member: 2682">Like Feynman infers in the interview I posted, it&#039;s not that the questions are bad questions. They can be excellent questions. However unless we have a clearer understanding of the different contexts that I ( and the article ) are talking about, we can find ourselves answering &quot;why&quot; type questions with &quot;how&quot; type answers, and the result will either be a dead-end or make no sense. This is the point I&#039;ve been trying to get across.I&#039;ll have to get to that later ( assuming you&#039;re genuinely interested ). Sometimes I get the feeling we&#039;re just trading points and counterpoints without actually applying the process to the problem.No problem.I am sure from an evolutionary perspective that it&#039;s completely safe to assume consciousness must be beneficial, at least in the manner we&#039;ve already discussed, not simply just because we have it, but because of the functions mentioned. Whether or not some other system could perform the same functions non-consciously is beside the point, because the functions are beneficial either way. That however doesn&#039;t mean consciousness doesn&#039;t have limitations.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Randall, post: 281763, member: 2682"] Like Feynman infers in the interview I posted, it's not that the questions are bad questions. They can be excellent questions. However unless we have a clearer understanding of the different contexts that I ( and the article ) are talking about, we can find ourselves answering "why" type questions with "how" type answers, and the result will either be a dead-end or make no sense. This is the point I've been trying to get across. I'll have to get to that later ( assuming you're genuinely interested ). Sometimes I get the feeling we're just trading points and counterpoints without actually applying the process to the problem. No problem. I am sure from an evolutionary perspective that it's completely safe to assume consciousness must be beneficial, at least in the manner we've already discussed, not simply just because we have it, but because of the functions mentioned. Whether or not some other system could perform the same functions non-consciously is beside the point, because the functions are beneficial either way. That however doesn't mean consciousness doesn't have limitations. [/QUOTE]

Verification