Click here to read my ongoing interview with Tal Bachman.

Post by **_Tal Bachman** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 3:33 am

How do I know I'm conscious? Is that a joke?

Let me answer that with another question:

How do you know you're conscious? Or are you really suggesting you are unsure right now whether you're conscious or not?

Post by **_wenglund** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:17 pm

Tal Bachman wrote:How do I know I'm conscious? Is that a joke?

Let me answer that with another question:

How do you know you're conscious? Or are you really suggesting you are unsure right now whether you're conscious or not?

No...it is not a joke. Just answer the question (Remember, I am doing the interviewing here).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Post by **_MormonMendacity** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:29 pm

wenglund wrote:No...it is not a joke. Just answer the question (Remember, I am doing the interviewing here).

Sorry for interrupting this riveting discussion, but does it feel to anyone else like Wade always slaps Tal on the back of the head after asking his question?

Just wondering.

Okay...back to the action!

Post by **_Tal Bachman** » Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:55 pm

I know I'm conscious because I'm conscious, ya weirdo! lol

I've always thought it was impossible for the fact of their own consciousness to be less than axiomatic for conscious people. Strange how it doesn't seem that way to you...I've never heard of such a thing.

You sure you're keeping the Word of Wisdom?

Worried,

Tal

Post by **_wenglund** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:44 am

Tal Bachman wrote:I know I'm conscious because I'm conscious, ya weirdo! lol

I've always thought it was impossible for the fact of their own consciousness to be less than axiomatic for conscious people. Strange how it doesn't seem that way to you...I've never heard of such a thing.

You sure you're keeping the Word of Wisdom? Worried, Tal

Do you realize that is the epitomy of circular reasoning?

I'll put it in syllogism form for you:

P1). If Talism cannot be defended on its own terms, it cannot be defended at all;

P2.) Tal's defense of Talism is that one knows one is conscious based on one knowing that one is conscious.

p3.) This is the epitomy of circular reasoning, and thus fallacious.

C1.) Therefore, judging at least by Tal's account, Talism is indefensible.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Post by **_Tal Bachman** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:22 pm

Wow, you really got me, Wade. I guess this means that not only are we both totally unconscious right now, or at least, that neither of us knows if we are conscious or not (despite us being conscious enough to even ponder that question), but that there is some alternative means whereby we could even judge that syllogisms are fallacious, or that we are unconscious right now, other than both being conscious right now.

The Bachman ship does down in flames!

Tal

Post by **_Runtu** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:26 pm

Tal Bachman wrote:Wow, you really got me, Wade. I guess this means that not only are we both totally unconscious right now, but that there is some alternative means whereby we could even judge that syllogisms are fallacious, or that we are unconscious right now, other than both being conscious right now.

The Bachman ship does down in flames!

Tal

Forgive me for butting in, but we've crossed the line into lunacy here. Our own consciousness is the only certainty that we can know. It's what's beyond our consciousness that we cannot know for a certainty.

Post by **_Tal Bachman** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:30 pm

Au contraire, Runtu. You must be a semi-educated fundamentalist, just like I used to be before I was enlightened by Wade, if you really think you're conscious.

(Archly sniffing) I don't see anything "loonie" or "funny" here in the slightest. Wade's just proven that no conscious being knows whether they're conscious or not, despite consciousness itself facilitating our very capacity to wonder if we know whether we're conscious or not.

What a naïve boob you are, Runtu.

T.

Post by **_Runtu** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:31 pm

Tal Bachman wrote:Au contraire, Runtu. You must be a semi-educated fundamentalist, just like I used to be before I was enlightened by Wade, if you really think you're conscious.

(Archly sniffing) I don't see anything "loonie" or "funny" here in the slightest. Wade's just proven that no conscious being knows whether they're conscious or not, despite consciousness itself facilitating our very capacity to wonder if we know whether we're conscious or not.

What a naïve boob you are, Runtu.

T.

Yeah, a naïve, fundamentalist boob prone to conspiracy theories and rigidly opposed to self-criticism. Why, I'm the salt of the earth. :-)

Post by **_MormonMendacity** » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:37 pm

Runtu wrote:
Tal Bachman wrote:Au contraire, Runtu. You must be a semi-educated fundamentalist, just like I used to be before I was enlightened by Wade, if you really think you're conscious.

(Archly sniffing) I don't see anything "loonie" or "funny" here in the slightest. Wade's just proven that no conscious being knows whether they're conscious or not, despite consciousness itself facilitating our very capacity to wonder if we know whether we're conscious or not.

What a naïve boob you are, Runtu.

T.

Yeah, a naïve, fundamentalist boob prone to conspiracy theories and rigidly opposed to self-criticism. Why, I'm the salt of the earth. :-)

But c'mon...the "ya wierdo" retort was superb! (I guess Tal probably got annoyed at Wade slapping him in the back of the head.)