My responses are in bold type.
12.1.1.1
gpuccio
October 26, 2011 at 3:05 am
Petrushka:
thank you for the interesting proposals.
I fully endorse #1, that can be a good description of a god.
I appreciate the other three, but personally I would not consider them good explanations. But you know, it’s personal.
Yet just the other day you said:
"Therefore, unless you want to dogmatically impose your personal views about what is called by all “the hard problem of consciousness”, certainly one of the most fundamental unsolved problems in human thought, you cannot ask that others share your subjective ideology."
Well, gpukio, you don't seem to have any problem with dogmatically imposing your wacky "personal views" and "subjective ideology" and asserting them as though they are absolute truths that others should eagerly accept. You're just another typical, self-righteous, blubbering IDiot.
12.1.1.1
gpuccio
October 26, 2011 at 3:05 am
Petrushka:
thank you for the interesting proposals.
I fully endorse #1, that can be a good description of a god.
I appreciate the other three, but personally I would not consider them good explanations. But you know, it’s personal.
Yet just the other day you said:
"Therefore, unless you want to dogmatically impose your personal views about what is called by all “the hard problem of consciousness”, certainly one of the most fundamental unsolved problems in human thought, you cannot ask that others share your subjective ideology."
Well, gpukio, you don't seem to have any problem with dogmatically imposing your wacky "personal views" and "subjective ideology" and asserting them as though they are absolute truths that others should eagerly accept. You're just another typical, self-righteous, blubbering IDiot.
