tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post6810568434005053239..comments2024-03-28T19:56:42.305-05:00Comments on Alexander Pruss's Blog: Degrees of consciousnessAlexander R Prusshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-18599105406485055392009-06-02T10:28:52.080-05:002009-06-02T10:28:52.080-05:00On the issue of continuous variation in which you'...On the issue of continuous variation in which you're interested, it would seem to be affected by things like prior experience or awareness. The "degree of consciousness" of an object might vary, for instance, based on whether you had just read an essay, or observed a color sheet, on the variations of blue in the world. Then, for instance, your next encounter with your familiar blue couch, a prior object of your fixed world's content, would take on a new level of attention as you parsed which variation of blue the couch is.n This falls into your category of vibrance, but seems to be fed by both the eyes and newfound attention to the world of blueness.Tim Lacyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04098955217921572372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-12926068121097064232009-06-01T19:55:38.546-05:002009-06-01T19:55:38.546-05:00I would agree that typically initially it would be...I would agree that typically initially it would be premature to <em>conclude</em> to a supernatural cause. <br /><br />However:<br />1. It is not premature immediately to take the case to be <em>some</em> evidence of a supernatural cause. Indeed, on plausible assumptions, Bayesianism requires us to take it as such evidence.<br /><br />2. After further investigation, it may cease to be premature to thus conclude. <br /><br />3. Some events depart so far from what we think is natural that an immediate conclusion to a supernatural cause would be reasonable. Thus, if the doctor saw that x had an empty eye-socket, then the doctor went away for an hour or two, and when the doctor came back, there was a working eye in that eye socket, and x had a story about Padre Pio appearing to him and restoring the eye, then I think it would be reasonable for the doctor, if he is sure that the socket was empty, to conclude to a supernatural explanation. (If memory serves, this is basically a real case, if the doctor didn't confuse the eye sockets. The doctor, who was previously an atheist, became a theist, or so I've read in a bio of Padre Pio. I haven't verified the sources, so let's leave it as just a theoretical case.)Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-25746455052402344212009-06-01T12:27:58.134-05:002009-06-01T12:27:58.134-05:00Hi Dr. Pruss,
I apologize if this question is off...Hi Dr. Pruss,<br /><br />I apologize if this question is off-topic. I was curious to know if you accept or reject the following methodological principle: <br /><br />Whenever we encounter a scientifically unexplained phenomenon, which we have not adequately studied scientifically, and which appears to contradict our current scientific theories, it would be unjustified or premature to conclude that the phenomenon probably has a supernatural cause.Spencerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01066089293772059329noreply@blogger.com