rationalskepticism.org

jamest wrote:

Spinozasgalt wrote:

jamest wrote:I wrote in a level-3 philosophy course (philosophy of mind) stating why I thought no zombie could have created a chocolate factory as a ruse to proving why humans could not be zombies in the general sense of what that concept implied. I did NOT write about certain philosophers nor about their own perceptions of what zombies were, because if I did I wouldn't have been writing about chocolate factories.

No. I doubt that, jamest. Because...

Spinozasgalt wrote:...if you did study philosophy of mind and were tasked with writing a piece about zombies, the zombies referred to in the piece would be p-zombies: these are the zombies relevant to philosophy of mind. We can see quite clearly that you've mistaken the concept for something else when you write the following to Thommo:

jamest wrote:Don't be a dingbat. As you must know, the ONLY point of the zombie debate in philosophy is to undermine the notion of spirit/mind, rather to undermine the notion that 'we' are more than physical/chemical/robotic beings. It's basically a physicalist counter to idealism!!

Nevertheless, there is more to discuss here than our behavioural similarities. Hence, chocolate factories. For I put it to you that we cannot be equated to zombies in any form due to the FACT that we have created chocolate factories. Zombies would never have done this, even in an eternity!!!

And that's the point of the debate, because it puts the zombie argument to bed for an eternity!!!

Rather than admit your mistake, you've apparently decided to change tack and say you were never talking about the same concept because you didn't specifically use the term "p-zombie". But discussing the concept is not the same as naming it and you clearly thought you were discussing the concept.

I need more than you "doubt it". I don't come here as often as I used to. When I do come, if you want my attention, please be more convincing.