Human Consciousness: Role of the unconscious (Humans)

by David Turell , Thursday, February 11, 2016, 18:44 (3206 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw; My point is that despite the colossal gulf in degree, there is a straightforward evolutionary explanation. You have explained in your second book that Adler regards our “different in kind” form of consciousness as being immaterial, and as such it supports theism. But you have also said that animals may have “souls”, in which case they too would have an immaterial form of consciousness.So in that context it really makes no difference whether our consciousness is different in degree or in kind. -That animals might have souls is a tenet of Judaism, nothing more.-> dhw: You have also said that Adler does not believe computers will ever be able to “think” like humans. I'm inclined to agree.-You are referring to Penrose.-> dhw: I don't believe bacteria, ants or elephants will ever think like humans either. And I don't believe humans will ever think like bacteria, ants or elephants. So what exactly is the importance of the degree versus kind debate? If Adler has an answer which you agree with, I'd be grateful if you would sum it up - you are always very good at condensing arguments, and one great advantage of this forum is we discuss things person to person rather than being directed to an endless reading list.-On page 396 of my Atheist Delusion book is a comment that Adler bases his conclusions on our ability to have immaterial thoughts. Animals don't have 'concepts'. We do. Here is the gap that Nagel refers to. Adler's thoughts are from 1967. A in evolutinll the research since then has not changed anything.