Dogs, mirrors, self awareness...

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Goo wrote:

dh pointed out:

The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.

That's just one possibility Goo, and a very unlikely one.

lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:


dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about. You don't
understand them, because you've never read anything
about it, and your own uninformed "opinions" about it
are those of a drug-abusing uneducated cracker.

Rudy Canoza wrote:
lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:


dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about. You don't
understand them, because you've never read anything
about it, and your own uninformed "opinions" about it
are those of a drug-abusing uneducated cracker.

Many thoughts and beliefs of great philosophers of the past have been
disproven through proper scientific experimentation. The mirror test is
not widely accepted by the scientific community as being a test for
self-awareness in animals, therefore, no true assumption about the
presence or lack of self-awareness can be made with the mirror test.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:47:18 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:

lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:


dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about.

Explain or at least list them all Goober, so we can learn
what it is you're trying to talk about.

You don't
understand them, because you've never read anything
about it, and your own uninformed "opinions" about it
are those of a drug-abusing uneducated cracker.

You'll prove that you not only can't explain anything, you
probably can't even make a list of things you pretend to
understand. It'll be another example for the cowardice Goo.

****wit David Harrison, felon, lied:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:47:18 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:


lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:


On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:



dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about.


Explain or at least list them all, so we can learn
what it is you're talking about.

What the **** do you mean, "all", ****wit? You just
revealed, yet again, that you not only don't know what
youre talking about, but you don't even know the right
questions to ask. Philosophers of mind are not in
unanimous agreement on what they are, you stupid ****,
so there *can not* be an "all".

Here are *some*, ****wit, and they indicate that again,
you are grossly over your head.

- being aware that one is a being separate from others,
*and* from the rest of the environment

- being aware, as a direct implication of one's own
self awareness, that *others* are self aware

- knowing that one has a beginning and an end

- knowing that one exists at a particular place and time,
which *necessarily* implies that there are other
places and times in which the self aware being does
*not* exist


At the very best, ****wit, you stupid unaware log, dogs
could conceivably meet the first; but there is no
evidence they do, and people like you who just
stubbornly insist they do have no evidence to support
the belief, only your own wishful thinking.

Dogs clearly do not have the next three.

Rudy Canoza wrote:
****wit David Harrison, felon, lied:

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:47:18 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:


lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:


On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:



dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about.


Explain or at least list them all, so we can learn
what it is you're talking about.

What the **** do you mean, "all", ****wit? You just
revealed, yet again, that you not only don't know what
youre talking about, but you don't even know the right
questions to ask. Philosophers of mind are not in
unanimous agreement on what they are, you stupid ****,
so there *can not* be an "all".

Here are *some*, ****wit, and they indicate that again,
you are grossly over your head.

- being aware that one is a being separate from others,
*and* from the rest of the environment

- being aware, as a direct implication of one's own
self awareness, that *others* are self aware

- knowing that one has a beginning and an end

- knowing that one exists at a particular place and time,
which *necessarily* implies that there are other
places and times in which the self aware being does
*not* exist


At the very best, ****wit, you stupid unaware log, dogs
could conceivably meet the first; but there is no
evidence they do, and people like you who just
stubbornly insist they do have no evidence to support
the belief, only your own wishful thinking.

Dogs clearly do not have the next three.

And you have no evidence that they don't. All you have is your wishful
thinking.

wrote:

Rudy Canoza wrote:

****wit David Harrison, felon, lied:


On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:47:18 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:



lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:



On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:




dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about.


Explain or at least list them all, so we can learn
what it is you're talking about.

What the **** do you mean, "all", ****wit? You just
revealed, yet again, that you not only don't know what
youre talking about, but you don't even know the right
questions to ask. Philosophers of mind are not in
unanimous agreement on what they are, you stupid ****,
so there *can not* be an "all".

Here are *some*, ****wit, and they indicate that again,
you are grossly over your head.

- being aware that one is a being separate from others,
*and* from the rest of the environment

- being aware, as a direct implication of one's own
self awareness, that *others* are self aware

- knowing that one has a beginning and an end

- knowing that one exists at a particular place and time,
which *necessarily* implies that there are other
places and times in which the self aware being does
*not* exist


At the very best, ****wit, you stupid unaware log, dogs
could conceivably meet the first; but there is no
evidence they do, and people like you who just
stubbornly insist they do have no evidence to support
the belief, only your own wishful thinking.

Dogs clearly do not have the next three.


And you have no evidence that they don't.

Not my burden of proof, dumbo. If you assert that
something is so, it is up to you to support your claim.

Get busy.

Rudy Canoza wrote:
wrote:

Rudy Canoza wrote:

****wit David Harrison, felon, lied:


On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 15:47:18 GMT, Rudy Canoza wrote:



lying convict ****wit David Harrison lied:



On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 Rudy Canoza wrote:




dh pointed out:


The mirror test indicates that they don't have self recognition,
not that they don't have self awareness.

Yes, it indicates they lack self awareness.


That's just one possibility Rudy, and a very unlikely one.

The likeliest one, ****wit, particularly when you
understand *all* of the aspects of self awareness that
"philosophers of mind" are talking about.


Explain or at least list them all, so we can learn
what it is you're talking about.

What the **** do you mean, "all", ****wit? You just
revealed, yet again, that you not only don't know what
youre talking about, but you don't even know the right
questions to ask. Philosophers of mind are not in
unanimous agreement on what they are, you stupid ****,
so there *can not* be an "all".

Here are *some*, ****wit, and they indicate that again,
you are grossly over your head.

- being aware that one is a being separate from others,
*and* from the rest of the environment

- being aware, as a direct implication of one's own
self awareness, that *others* are self aware

- knowing that one has a beginning and an end

- knowing that one exists at a particular place and time,
which *necessarily* implies that there are other
places and times in which the self aware being does
*not* exist


At the very best, ****wit, you stupid unaware log, dogs
could conceivably meet the first; but there is no
evidence they do, and people like you who just
stubbornly insist they do have no evidence to support
the belief, only your own wishful thinking.

Dogs clearly do not have the next three.


And you have no evidence that they don't.

Not my burden of proof, dumbo. If you assert that
something is so, it is up to you to support your claim.

Get busy.

Yes Rudy, get busy supporting your claim. I have done my part already.