Skip Navigation

Posts
4
Comments
303
Joined
3 wk. ago

  • There are certainly more ethical implications to the science of consciousness than there are to other sciences, but I feel like that's a different discussion

  • Very interesting take. I think you might be onto something. Similar to the concept of 'fan death' in Korea. I've heard it's often the go-to cause of death when the real cause of death is considered embarrassing or shameful

  • That makes sense. But I feel like the warnings about not falling asleep in the bathtub are often handed out generically, including to people who are perfectly sober and in good health

  • Yeah thats why I’m so sceptical of this whole thing. Like, wouldn’t you just wake up before drowning?

  • I guess if you get some water in your lungs it might make sense that you struggle to get enough oxygen. I guess it depends on how deep of an inhale you take before you notice and start to wake up

  • Yes some stats would be nice. If it were really that dangerous to fall asleep in the bath I think it would be negligent to let children take unsupervised baths, yet kids do all the time (at least I did when I was a kid). I think thats because most people intuitively know that drowning is not super likely

  • Okay thats fair enough. Does inhaling water generally make people pass out?

  • But do you drown instantly? Surely as soon as you got water in your throat you’d wake up and start coughing or something

  • At this point I say we should just cut our losses and just let that bridge sit unoccupied for now

  • Are you suggesting that consciousness is the only science that has to contend with extreme skeptical scenarios?

  • I see

  • Yeah even for HOA standards this seems crazy though. Like, not being allowed to change your lock? That seems like a massive security risk. Especially given the circumstances. Why does the HOA even care do they need access to everyone’s place?

  • based

    Jump
  • Can you give me the TL;DR? 

  • I agree with you completely

  • Yeah I think targeting income brackets is the way to go. It’s a more precise target. Because not everyone from a minority group is economically disenfranchised, though of course many are. So targeting income brackets would still have the effect of increasing diversity, but at the same time it would ensure that the individuals benefiting from these programs are those that need it most.

  • This is not unique to the science of consciousness. Extreme scepticism can kill any science from the get-go. Sure, we can’t prove that other beings are conscious. But we also can’t prove that the external world exists, either. Does that mean we’re doing to stop doing physics? No, because some forms of extreme scepticism are simply unreasonable. If we wait around for solutions to these radical sceptical scenarios then we’re never going to get anywhere.

  • How do we know that certain wavelengths of light produce certain visual experiences (the colour red, green etc)? How do we know that electrical stimulation to certain parts of the brain can cause certain experiences (such as the hallucination of sounds or smells etc.)? That’s because we test on consciousness indirectly all the time, through first-person reports. So to say that we cannot test any hypothesis related to consciousness is demonstrably false.

  • Interesting. And yeah I fid see that Claire Obscure Expedition 33 stuff actually haha.

    Thank you for your perspective and your advice! I appreciate it.

  • Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for explaining