Sg3 on 9/2/2011 at 05:48
I think it's interesting. Perhaps none of us are saying anything that hasn't been said before, but it's certainly educational to hear all the different theories, especially with each person's unique description of it and different point of view on it.
Vivian on 9/2/2011 at 11:53
Quote Posted by Sg3
How can we feel them if we're only "meat puppets"?
Of course we're basically biological robots, meat puppets or whatever. What else could we possibly be? And meat puppets obviously have feelings because we have feelings. QED.
Sg3 on 9/2/2011 at 15:32
Quote Posted by Vivian
And meat puppets obviously have feelings because we have feelings. QED.
That doesn't make any sense at all. I thought the "meat puppet" term meant that we didn't have real feelings. We can't be creatures-without-real-feelings which have real feelings, you know?
But like Subjective Effect pointed out, we all seem to be using different uses of "meat puppet." I agree that humans (like all other animals) are essentially "biological robots," but I disagree with the suggestion that we don't have real feelings. I can't see it. I can't wrap my brain around it. It isn't an emotional barrier, I think; I just can't make any sort of sense of it. How can my feelings not be real when I feel them? How can they be an illusion, since an illusion by definition requires a consciousness to experience? If not experienced by me, then by what else? I'm the one experiencing it. Gah! What a crazy thing.
Vivian on 9/2/2011 at 15:55
I think you're approaching the 'who gives a fuck' level of empiricism, there. I.E. the point at which there is no answer, and so no real question.
Sg3 on 9/2/2011 at 23:03
I would say that "I don't presently have the ability to comprehend the question or its answer" is a better statement than "there is no answer and so no real question."
gunsmoke on 11/2/2011 at 04:34
I always like to think about the acid connections we would have back in the day.
For example, 3 of us would hang out all day, every day. We experienced countless things together. Most of the time, we all noticed or felt something just a bit differently than the other 2. Perhaps the personal twist. Hard to say for sure.
But, when we were on acid, we would be locked into this single conscience, to the point we have communicated without any verbal or visual cues. We would experience an event together, then talk about it later, only to find out it was like we were in each others' minds. I had thoughts that I didn't share with anyone that Joy and Claire could both dictate to me individually without any cues or hints.
So, we (in our opinions) were as close as one could come to being inside another person's mind and experiencing what they did when they experienced it, and then had the same reaction to it.
These aren't stupid idiots, either. Joy is an Anesthesiologist, and Claire has a Master's in Botany. Not just dumb hippy burn-outs.
Just thought I'd share that.
Sg3 on 11/2/2011 at 14:43
Quote Posted by Wormrat
Maybe if you're in the business of allowing sophists the smug defense of "You just don't get it." I prefer to call a spade a spade.
Thing is, I'm pretty sure they don't have the ability to comprehend it, either. The "I" wasn't supposed to mean me specifically; I should have said, "humans don't presently have the ability to comprehend the question or its answer."
Briareos H on 11/2/2011 at 19:24
(which is incoherent btw)
(do i see a spade?)
SubJeff on 13/2/2011 at 22:54
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
So, we (in our opinions) were as close as one could come to being inside another person's mind and experiencing what they did when they experienced it, and then had the same reaction to it.
Interesting.
Might I posit an alternative hypothesis? (your joke loses you 10 points if you even dare)
Rather than the 3 of you having some "shared" consciousness you all had a similar response to the same drug, which in itself isn't surprising since it does act on specific receptors. To wit; if you had all had cocaine one of the effects would have been a raised heart rate and yet you wouldn't claim to have had a shared heartbeat. I suggest that the acid removes some of the personality traits that make you respond to stimuli in an individual way and so make you all act in a stereotypical "acid" way. Didn't Huxley say this about some psychoactives he used to take - that it removes filters or switches off the reducing valves or something? Which fits perfectly well with one of the neurobiological theories of schizophrenia relating to the loss of (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_inhibition) Latent Inhibition and the schizophrenic behaviours/thinking patterns that acid can cause. I'm not saying there is a link between taking the drug and the illness btw, but there are obvious similarities.
Quote:
We would experience an event together, then talk about it later, only to find out it was like we were in each others' minds.
Perhaps the acid wasn't "opening" your mind to a shared experience but closing your minds so you were all only capable of perceiving those experiences in one way, the way dictated by the drug.
NB: Do not, I repeat, do not think about this concept if you are actually on acid. I don't want you freaking yourself out and I'm sitting here sober as a rock (natch) and the concept of a drug that can "make" me think a certain way scares the crap out me.
Quote:
Still waiting on Demagogue's reply, by the by.
I think when I brought out the God card he decided he wasn't up for it anymore. :(
demagogue on 13/2/2011 at 23:38
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
I think when I brought out the God card he decided he wasn't up for it anymore. :(
No I've just been trying to find time to write out a decent reply that isn't book length, and I didn't want to just do a knee jerk reply. I actually got something written out last night, but trying to make it shorter and readable, which seems tougher than it should be. I'll post it one way or another soon.
I wanted to give a general picture and what's persuasive to me at least, not just arguing specific points by itself.
