Daniel Dennett on Privileged Access - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-29T01:33:38Zhttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A49902&feed=yes&xn_auth=noHi,yes, I’m not sure the degr…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-08-03:5301756:Comment:617572015-08-03T02:45:27.860Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>Hi,<br></br>yes, I’m not sure the degree to which I agree with Bakker or even Brassier, but I thought it all relevant to this thread. Yet another “theory of consciousness” to add grist for the mill.<br></br> <br></br> <cite>Balder said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?id=5301756%3ATopic%3A4172&page=19#5301756Comment61736"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>Kelaaaaa! Nice to see you round these parts again. This…</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Hi,<br/>yes, I’m not sure the degree to which I agree with Bakker or even Brassier, but I thought it all relevant to this thread. Yet another “theory of consciousness” to add grist for the mill.<br/> <br/> <cite>Balder said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?id=5301756%3ATopic%3A4172&page=19#5301756Comment61736"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>Kelaaaaa! Nice to see you round these parts again. This looks like an interesting essay - I love the opening aphorism...</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Yes, I can’t say that I grokk…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-08-03:5301756:Comment:618872015-08-03T02:41:51.229Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>Yes, I can’t say that I grokked it all in one reading, but thought this “Blind Brain Theory” of consciousness might be of relevance to this thread.<br></br> <br></br> <cite>Ambo Suno said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?id=5301756%3ATopic%3A4172&page=19#5301756Comment61850"><div class="xg_user_generated">Hi Kela - I enjoyed and slogged through this article, apparently grokking enough to feel exhilerated and…</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, I can’t say that I grokked it all in one reading, but thought this “Blind Brain Theory” of consciousness might be of relevance to this thread.<br/> <br/> <cite>Ambo Suno said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?id=5301756%3ATopic%3A4172&page=19#5301756Comment61850"><div class="xg_user_generated">Hi Kela - I enjoyed and slogged through this article, apparently grokking enough to feel exhilerated and frightened (his words), and I'll add varying somewhere between acting-as-if-clarity and as floundering plus. As usual.</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="xg_user_generated"></div> Hello all,I guess I posted th…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-08-03:5301756:Comment:618862015-08-03T02:30:33.417Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>Hello all,<br></br>I guess I posted this as I was looking up Ray Brassier and this chap, R.S. Bakker and his “blind brain theory of consciousness" came up. Bakker is a sci fi writer but he seems fairly well read in philosophy of mind. Bakker's whole tack reminded me of this discussion, and I thought I’d tie in Brassier and his current work on Sellars and the “scientific image” of man and the “manifest image” of man for good measure.<br></br>Still thinking about this stuff. Was recently reading…</p>
<p>Hello all,<br/>I guess I posted this as I was looking up Ray Brassier and this chap, R.S. Bakker and his “blind brain theory of consciousness" came up. Bakker is a sci fi writer but he seems fairly well read in philosophy of mind. Bakker's whole tack reminded me of this discussion, and I thought I’d tie in Brassier and his current work on Sellars and the “scientific image” of man and the “manifest image” of man for good measure.<br/>Still thinking about this stuff. Was recently reading Marcus Aurelius and thinking about his “view from above,” and how it fits in with the "scientific image” and with non-anthropomorphic/anthropocentric thinking. <br/>Have recently been introduced to the writing of John Gray -- no, not the “Men are from Mars” dude -- the famous pessimist. Have been reading <em>Straw Dogs</em>, where he attacks teleological and progressivist thinking. He also a proponent of the Gaia hypothesis, at least he is in this book, so it’s a odd mix reading him. :-)</p>
<p></p> Pithy video on the topic, K.…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-07-28:5301756:Comment:617372015-07-28T23:16:05.573ZAmbo Sunohttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/AmboSuno
Pithy video on the topic, K.<br />
<br />
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>kelamuni said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A61850#5301756Comment61849"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>Blind Brain Theory of Consciousness</p>
<p><br/><a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U</a></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Pithy video on the topic, K.<br />
<br />
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>kelamuni said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A61850#5301756Comment61849"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>Blind Brain Theory of Consciousness</p>
<p><br/><a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U</a></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Hi Kela - I enjoyed and slogg…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-07-28:5301756:Comment:618502015-07-28T23:02:07.267ZAmbo Sunohttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/AmboSuno
Hi Kela - I enjoyed and slogged through this article, apparently grokking enough to feel exhilerated and frightened (his words), and I'll add varying somewhere between acting-as-if-clarity and as floundering plus. As usual.<br />
<br />
There is so much here and I'd have to read it quite a lot more to more thoroughly understand it.<br />
<br />
I like how this material resonates and interdigitates with much of the other neuroscience, cognitive science, linguistics, natural sciences, and more that gets placed here on…
Hi Kela - I enjoyed and slogged through this article, apparently grokking enough to feel exhilerated and frightened (his words), and I'll add varying somewhere between acting-as-if-clarity and as floundering plus. As usual.<br />
<br />
There is so much here and I'd have to read it quite a lot more to more thoroughly understand it.<br />
<br />
I like how this material resonates and interdigitates with much of the other neuroscience, cognitive science, linguistics, natural sciences, and more that gets placed here on IPS. I'm thinking at the moment of George Lakoff in particular.<br />
<br />
Thanks for posting this.<br />
<br />
"Habermas’ analogy of “a consciousness that hangs like a marionette from an inscrutable criss-cross of strings” (“The Language Game or Responsible Agency and the Problem of Free Will,” 24) seems more and more likely to be the case, even at the cost of our ability to make metacognitive sense of our ‘selves’ or our ‘projects.’ (Evolution, to put the point delicately, doesn’t give a flying fuck about our ability to ‘accurately theorize’). This is the point I keep hammering via BBT. Once deliberative theoretical metacognition has been overthrown, it’s anybody’s guess how the functions we attribute to ourselves and others will map across the occluded, orthogonal functions of our brain. And this simply means that the human in its totality stands exposed to the implacable indifference of science…<br />
<br />
I think we should be frightened–and exhilarated.<br />
<br />
Our capacity to cognize ourselves is an evolutionary shot in the neural dark. Could anyone have predicted that ‘we’ have no direct access to our beliefs and motives, that ‘we’ have to interpret ourselves the way we interpret others? Could anyone have predicted the seemingly endless list of biases discovered by cognitive psychology? Or that the ‘feeling of willing’ might simply be the way ‘we’ take ownership of our behaviour post hoc? Or that ‘moral reasoning’ is primarily a PR device? Or that our brains regularly rewrite our memories? Think, Hume, the philosopher-prophet, and his observation that Adam could never deduce that water drowns or fire burns short of worldly experience. What we do, like what we are, is a genuine empirical mystery simply because our experience of ourselves, like our experience of earth’s motionless centrality, is the product of scant and misleading information."<br />
<br />
<br/>
<br/>
<cite>kelamuni said:</cite><blockquote cite="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/daniel-dennett-on-privileged?xg_source=activity&id=5301756%3ATopic%3A4172&page=18#5301756Comment62002"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p><span>"The second is </span><i>Metacognitive Incompetence</i><span>, the growing body of evidence that overthrows our traditional and intuitive assumptions of self-transparency. Before the rise of cognitive science, philosophy could continue more or less numb to the pinch of the first and all but blind to the throttling possibility of the latter. Now however, we live in an age where massive, wholesale self-deception, no matter what logical absurdities it seems to generate, is a very real empirical possibility.<br/><a rel="nofollow" href="https://rsbakker.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/brassiers-divided-soul/" target="_blank">https://rsbakker.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/brassiers-divided-soul/</a><br/></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Kelaaaaa! Nice to see you ro…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-07-28:5301756:Comment:617362015-07-28T15:31:52.826ZBalderhttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/BruceAlderman
<p>Kelaaaaa! Nice to see you round these parts again. This looks like an interesting essay - I love the opening aphorism...</p>
<p>Kelaaaaa! Nice to see you round these parts again. This looks like an interesting essay - I love the opening aphorism...</p> Blind Brain Theory of Conscio…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-07-28:5301756:Comment:618492015-07-28T15:29:11.019Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>Blind Brain Theory of Consciousness</p>
<p><br/><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U</a></p>
<p>Blind Brain Theory of Consciousness</p>
<p><br/><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2weE7AMs45U</a></p> "The second is Metacognitive…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2015-07-28:5301756:Comment:620022015-07-28T14:53:34.260Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p><span>"The second is </span><i>Metacognitive Incompetence</i><span>, the growing body of evidence that overthrows our traditional and intuitive assumptions of self-transparency. Before the rise of cognitive science, philosophy could continue more or less numb to the pinch of the first and all but blind to the throttling possibility of the latter. Now however, we live in an age where massive, wholesale self-deception, no matter what logical absurdities it seems to generate, is a very real…</span></p>
<p><span>"The second is </span><i>Metacognitive Incompetence</i><span>, the growing body of evidence that overthrows our traditional and intuitive assumptions of self-transparency. Before the rise of cognitive science, philosophy could continue more or less numb to the pinch of the first and all but blind to the throttling possibility of the latter. Now however, we live in an age where massive, wholesale self-deception, no matter what logical absurdities it seems to generate, is a very real empirical possibility.<br/><a href="https://rsbakker.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/brassiers-divided-soul/" target="_blank">https://rsbakker.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/brassiers-divided-soul/</a><br/></span></p> See this post by Helen De Cru…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-07-31:5301756:Comment:503992013-07-31T01:01:56.181ZEdward theurj Bergehttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>See <a href="http://www.newappsblog.com/2013/07/mystical-perception-as-a-learned-skill-and-implications-for-religious-epistemology.html" target="_blank">this post</a> by Helen De Cruz from a group blog in which Protevi participates. A few excerpts:</p>
<p>"In the epistemology of religion, authors like Swinburne and Alston have argued influentially that mystical experience of God provides prima facie justification for some beliefs we hold about God on the basis of such experiences. [...] What…</p>
<p>See <a href="http://www.newappsblog.com/2013/07/mystical-perception-as-a-learned-skill-and-implications-for-religious-epistemology.html" target="_blank">this post</a> by Helen De Cruz from a group blog in which Protevi participates. A few excerpts:</p>
<p>"In the epistemology of religion, authors like Swinburne and Alston have argued influentially that mystical experience of God provides prima facie justification for some beliefs we hold about God on the basis of such experiences. [...] What Luhrmann found was that evangelicals engage in cognitive practices: deliberate exercises that seem to facilitate (although they do not guarantee) direct awareness of God. [...] In the practices Luhrmann describes, religious experience is not like ordinary perception, which requires no conscious or deliberate training, but more like a skilled perception, such as that of an art connoisseur or a scientist. [...] If religious experience is indeed critically shaped by cultivating the right skills, there is the worry that the experiences elicited in this way aren't veridical, because the skills aren't skills at all. [...] Kitcher recognizes that the circular dependency of perception and skill [...] might constitute a problem. [...] Given that the persistent practice within a religious tradition can easily give rise to M-perception in accordance with that tradition, it seems hard to maintain that M-perception could ever give rise to justified religious beliefs, <a href="http://prosblogion.ektopos.com/archives/2013/07/gods-existence.html" target="_blank">let alone religious knowledge</a>."</p> thanks theurg. it's interesti…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2013-07-29:5301756:Comment:506462013-07-29T08:28:21.998Zkelamunihttps://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/kelamuni
<p>thanks theurg. it's interesting how his line of inquiry is paralleling our own here, or at least some of us. i think he may be right as per the reliance merely on phenomenology where subjective states are concerned. the comments on theological puffery in the discourse of wilber is interesting too -- a kind of parallelism to what i have referred to as hyperbolic exaggeration. i've also had the sense that ken does not read to discover or explore and try to understand the insights of others,…</p>
<p>thanks theurg. it's interesting how his line of inquiry is paralleling our own here, or at least some of us. i think he may be right as per the reliance merely on phenomenology where subjective states are concerned. the comments on theological puffery in the discourse of wilber is interesting too -- a kind of parallelism to what i have referred to as hyperbolic exaggeration. i've also had the sense that ken does not read to discover or explore and try to understand the insights of others, but as a means to support what he already thinks.</p>