• 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!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Consciousness and the Paranormal — Part 11

Forums New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
marduk said:
Prove it.
Click to expand...

Prove the opposite, Marduk. You can't. :) Nor are you familiar with the scope of phenomenological, biological, ethological, and Affective Neuroscientific approaches to and investigations of the nature of consciousness and mind.
 
Last edited:
marduk said:
I find it fascinating that you criticize Randall for making an assumption by making an assumption about what he bases his argument on, instead of attacking that argument directly.

While claiming that he will never begin to understand something that you clearly also do not understand.

You are making an emotional argument where there is no emotional component to argue.
Click to expand...

It's a long time since I've received personal swipes from you, @marduk. I must say the interim has been pleasant. As usual, you have no conception of what I'm referring to or the research behind it. You just don't like it. Your response falls into my category of 'tuff shit'.
 
Constance said:
I probably should have said 'Randel's word on that?'.
Click to expand...
This might help: Terms of Service and Rules | The Paracast Community Forums

Basically, you can do whatever you want with content you create and so can Gene and those who have elevated privileges ( apart from reprinting substantial portions of it without Gene's permission ). Getting permission to post content created by others is your responsibility. If there are any complaints by third parties about infringement of their rights, Gene and those with elevated privileges can take whatever action is deemed necessary to resolve the problem. The usual fair-dealing ( fair use ) guidelines also apply. Personally, if anyone wants to use content I've created here in their own work, I don't have a problem with that provided that a proper citation or credit is included.
 
Last edited:
Constance said:
Prove the opposite, Marduk. You can't. :) Nor are you familiar with the scope of phenomenological, biological, ethological, and Affective Neuroscientific approaches to and investigations of the nature of consciousness and mind.
Click to expand...
And if you understood logic, you’d know that the one making the assertion is the one that has the burden of proof making the assertion.

I don’t have to prove you’re wrong. The burden is on you to prove that you’re right.

Lol.
 
Constance said:
It's a long time since I've received personal swipes from you, @marduk. I must say the interim has been pleasant. As usual, you have no conception of what I'm referring to or the research behind it. You just don't like it. Your response falls into my category of 'tuff shit'.
Click to expand...
I missed you too!

Love and kisses,
Marduk
 
Constance said:
Marduk, you're such a jerk.
Click to expand...
In all seriousness, I think your base assertion is that consciousness isn’t created by the brain, it’s facilitated by it.

Which means that it would arise from another source.

This is essentially dualism and has been well tested. How would you propose testing your assertion?
 
@Soupie Ontological Emergence: How is That Possible? Towards a New Relational Ontology
i read it and thought of you... re panpsychism

Also
@Constance
Have read cassirer’s ‘The philosophy of symbolic form vol 3 the phenomenology of knowledge’
I think you might like it. I enjoyed it. He was a pal of heidegger apparently...
Also check out Ferreira’s work on meaning: If you’re interested some of it aligns closely with mine

MP’s visible and invisible is v much WIAMANSE :)
 
Tute said:
@Soupie Ontological Emergence: How is That Possible? Towards a New Relational Ontology
i read it and thought of you... re panpsychism

Also
@Constance
Have read cassirer’s ‘The philosophy of symbolic form vol 3 the phenomenology of knowledge’
I think you might like it. I enjoyed it. He was a pal of heidegger apparently...
Also check out Ferreira’s work on meaning: If you’re interested some of it aligns closely with mine

MP’s visible and invisible is v much WIAMANSE :)
Click to expand...
Would love to read it but it's $39 for the PDF.
 
Tute said:
Also
@Constance
Have read cassirer’s ‘The philosophy of symbolic form vol 3 the phenomenology of knowledge’
I think you might like it. I enjoyed it. He was a pal of heidegger apparently...
Also check out Ferreira’s work on meaning: If you’re interested some of it aligns closely with mine
Click to expand...

Thanks for the references. My mentor in phenomenological philosophy recommended long ago that I read that volume and I will read it again now. Can you help me out with a link to the Ferreira work on meaning? The last few days I've been afflicted by searing headaches, episodes of whole-body shivering, exhaustion, and some kind of sleeping sickness. I think this was likely the result of some kind tick or other bite, and I'm getting better now but have missed a lot here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top