There's this kind of neuro phenomenology, have you heard about this, which is a marriage of continental philosophy and like neuroscience. I think Nagle's optimism here is just optimism for the sake of ending optimistically. It's an interesting idea to marry that with this objective, the objective third person methods of science and see what produces. But again, I can't tell me that that's happening. You know what it's like to be Heidegger? Like a super taster.
We try (with varying success) to wrap our heads around Thomas Nagel’s classic article “What is it Like to be a Bat?" Does science have the tools to give us a theory of consciousness or is that project doomed from the outset? Why do reductionist or functionalist explanations seem so unsatisfying? Is the problem that consciousness is subjective, or is it something about the nature of conscious experience itself? Is this ultimately an epistemological or metaphysical question? What are we talking about? Do we even know anymore?
Plus, the return of Mr. Robot! We talk about the big new mystery at the heart of the new season.
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: