1. I would say that if the conclusion that my camp induces was true, a drastic change in the way we approach problems of the consciousness would be necessary. 2. I think that the 5th dimension is neither ineffable nor capable of being described by 3rd and 4th dimensional terminology. It's just that of yet we have no 'units' in the 5th dimension. In space we have units of centimetres and kilograms and such, and in time we have seconds and minutes and hours and so on. In the 5th dimension so far we only have very unstandardised names for the different qualia. It is as if we had no centimetres and athor spacial measurements and could only *name* objects and describe them as 'big' or 'small' or 'heavy' or 'light'. If this were the case, we wouldn't think the 3rd dimension ineffable, merely unsophisticated. I should think this one of the goals of our camp; to increase the sophistication of 5th dimensional measurement. 3. The link you gave me was broken here, but suffice it to say I have never heard of it.

1. Would you say that our camp statement is arguing for a drastic rethinking of how consciousness 'should' be studied and understood? 2. Can the 5th dimension be understood, or is it ineffable? Are 3rd and 4th dimensional descriptors useful to describing the workings of 5th dimensional qualia? 3. Have you heard of the concept of strong and weak emergence? http://su.pr/2h9A7S