Neuroscientist loses a 25-year bet on consciousness — to a philosopher

I'm sure you'd agree that your arms and legs aren't generating desire or thoughts. Neither are your bones, skin or blood.

So, which part of you is generating desire or thoughts, so which part is the "you" that is performing these functions?
I would not think about eating if my body did not need nutrition.
 
Where does the neural network tell me to respond to your post--rather than, say, drink water?

I don't know if ALL intention works that way. But note that when you received the stimulus of my post you chose to respond rather than, say, fly an airplane. It's a stimulus you respond to.
 
Science cannot explain will by its own method.

I don't understand why you and Cypress both characterize things as "science or not science" and then start pointing at verbs as if that makes the point. Will is a thing. It is both a noun and a verb describing something we all "experience". The nature of it is what is being investigated.

And why do you make a universal declaration of "science cannot...." when no such evidence exists?
 
I don't understand why you and Cypress both characterize things as "science or not science" and then start pointing at verbs as if that makes the point. Will is a thing. It is both a noun and a verb describing something we all "experience". The nature of it is what is being investigated.

And why do you make a universal declaration of "science cannot...." when no such evidence exists?
they consider themselves intellectual gatekeepers of some kind.

they also consider themselves the definers of all religions.
 
Back
Top