This kind of retort is a rookie error in the field of philosophy of mind. It clings too closely to notions of 1) self-awareness as an essential component of awareness per se (it's not) and 2) awareness as an essential component of experience per se (it's not).
Edit: I was referring to the link, not the top-level comment. It reads like an attempt at rebuttal from someone relatively unfamiliar with the field writ large.
This kind of retort is a rookie error in the field of comedy. It clings too closely to notions like 1) there's no place for humor in a serious discussion (there is) and 2) you're smarter than everyone else (you're not)
https://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/projects/cogaff/misc/like...
This kind of retort is a rookie error in the field of philosophy of mind. It clings too closely to notions of 1) self-awareness as an essential component of awareness per se (it's not) and 2) awareness as an essential component of experience per se (it's not).
Edit: I was referring to the link, not the top-level comment. It reads like an attempt at rebuttal from someone relatively unfamiliar with the field writ large.
This kind of retort is a rookie error in the field of comedy. It clings too closely to notions like 1) there's no place for humor in a serious discussion (there is) and 2) you're smarter than everyone else (you're not)
1 reply →
I was referring to the link, not the top-level comment
The link was posted as an earlier example of the comment it was replying to.
2 replies →