Posted: Mar 06, 2010 10:09 am
by pl0bs
Prof. Faust wrote:Shouldn't you say "conception" rather than "misconception"?

If so, then "C is a conception that requires C" is tautologous. "C requires C." C could be anything. You have merely asserted that consciousness is not reducible.

It does not follow that C is not reducible from what you have written alone.
An example of a misconception is the thought that water/fire/earth/wind are the fundamental elements. They look very different to the human eye, but we now know they can be reduced to the same elementary particles.

Misconceptions cannot exist without a consciousness.