Picture of the author
Topic :
Thread Created at Invalid date | Started by
Number of Post in this thread: 1Please Sign In to comment on this Thread
Brent_Allsop replied 15 years ago (Apr 5th 2009, 11:15:52 pm)
Hi Steve, I noticed you objected to the proposed change to remove the 'Brain Linked' terminology from the statement for this camp. It sounds like you're concerned that 'Brain-linked' is important to tie consciousness to the brain. There are two parallel belief structures in this 'Hard Problem' topic, and also in the Theories of Consciousness topic here: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/6 We had a fairly long discussion on this issue over on that topic. Before we had 'brain linked', we had 'part of the brain'. But the issue with this was people like John Smythies did not support any kind of 'identity theory' (the idea that consciousness is only the brain.) as I believe they call it. So this is why we converted to 'brain linked'. But after further consideration, it was determined that 'brain linked' really had no significant utility at this more inclusive level. Everyone believes that consciousness is somehow linked to the brain, so there isn't much of a reason to state such in the title of a camp at this level since there is nothing else to distinguish this idea from. Titles of camps are critical to be very efficient and concise, so it seemed that 'brain linked' was not important enough to be included. Over on that topic, we decided that at this representational level, we wanted to include more people. So it was decided that the degree to which consciousness is part of, or linked to the brain would be included in sub camps. And I think the result over on that topic was a powerful and concise representation of the diversity of opinion and agreement on this issue. So, mostly, this change on this topic, for the same reasons, is just to keep things consistent across parallel structures. So, here are the issues I see with what we have now: * Parallel structures and terminologies are not consistent. * We only want concise definitive words in titles that make it easy to identify camps in comparison with other camps. * We want to be more inclusive at higher super camps, less well accepted ideas can be included at lower level camps. Would you agree that all these are important? If so, how might we change things to accomplish this in both topics, in a way that will not be objectionable to you? Upward, Brent Allsop