geordief

"Seeing" is like "understanding" or "learning" I think we only experience anything by reference to something else. There are no pure experiences ,just relationships between experiences. If someone is blind from birth and ,in our eyes has no understanding of what we experience when we see something we call "red" it is a sufficient to paint (no pun intended) a scene for them ,any scene will do. Then we tell them (say it is the scene of a shipwreck at sea.) "The boat is red" And ,with the scene in their mind they will associate that boat with "redness" That is their "red" from now on (so long as they remain blind and perhaps even if they later gain the faculty of vision)

Not an indication that the donkey's diet is deficient? In the past ,an ignorant animal inspector told us to feed them more and they ended up with laminitis.(the vet told us to ignore her-wrote her a nasty letter) We just let them graze the field now and only give them hay if the grass disappears in winter or if the weather is inclement.

A toad got into the house late at night when I was bringing in furniture from the rain. I spotted it on the carpet when I closed the door and went looking for a container to catch it into. I found it against the wall but it hopped away from my attempts at capture -as far as ,and into the open (cold) fire. I managed to quickly catch it with my right hand and carried it outside again where I cast it onto the wet and grassy lawn. I wondered afterwards whether it had suffered any damage from its brief visit to to fireplace. It was covered in wood and peat ash(cold as the fire had not been lit since the day before). Would that ash have damaged its skin? It was a wet night which ,with the long grass would have washed most of it off quite soon I imagine but I wonder how sensitive a skin a toad has and whether that might have been very damaging for it. On a related note ,whenever I dispose of those ashes normally I try to put the somewhere our donkeys cannot get at them because they will eat them and ,again I wonder how good that is for them (they also roll in them)

Can it be defined in different ways? Can it exist in different ways(as different phenomena but to which the description "consciousness" might apply)? Can we only understand "consciousness" by the function it fills? Naively I used to think it was like a binary on/off switch .Can there be degrees.Can it be both? ** Would those different ways have something in common? **oddly ,yesterday (and for the first time ever) as I went about town I noticed my mood dropping very quickly and for no apparent reason. Could that be a diminution of consciousness?(like a diminution of that "glad to be alive" feeling) Maybe it is a common feeling that I never noticed before..

Because consciousness is a process and not a thing?

The sooner we find life on other planets the better.Just try not to get trampled in the stampede trying to join them

Is that what a properly functioning system of laws is intended to counteract? At least if the administration of law is unjust it is visibly so and any decisions should have the weight of lengthy periods of consideration. Is the legal system in practice a buffer against blind hatred? What happened in Germany or USSR ,I wonder?Did the judges put up any resistance? Were those who did removed from their positions or did they just go with the flow? I imagine the legal system remained in place and formalities were still followed .

That's true but they have been under attack from their neighbours since the state was formed. What do their neighbours expect ?That they not defend themselves? Grossly insulting to compare their policies with that of Hitler. Why would anyone do that?

Another approach is to feel shame that any group of people in any way connected to oneself has committed or imagined such a vile collection of acts . They brought shame on themselves and all who did not actively oppose them. I can't understand why the OP thought his or any religion was relevant ,unless they were saying "well I am not Jewish and so am not biased in that respect " In other words ,perhaps implying that a Jewish person might have stronger feelings about it than others. It is an interesting point that vile acts have also been committed against other groups throughout history(even if the holocaust seems to have been the worst in concept because of its sickening rationality and preparation.) To analyse it ,whilst necessary almost seems to play into the hands of those who admire and seek to emulate the perpetrators. What frightens me is the thought that ,whilst this crime may have taken place in Germany other countries might well have been willing to participate . After all the Jews have been hounded down the centuries and Hitler may have been referring to this when he said that this industrial mass genocide would resolve the "Jewish question" once and for all.

(Geordief asked "Is it right that some people consider the total energy in the universe to be zero" Gennady answered "Yes" ) If that is anyway near correct ,the expression "an infinite amount of energy" seems close to being a contradiction in terms..

In any case energy is a (relative) number rather than a thing isn't it. An infinite number of energies might sum up to a very small 'resultant" (is that right?) whereas there might be a way of directing the energy systems (whatever that means) so as to sum up to an infinite resultant . I imagine that is meaningless gobbledegook but perhaps you can devine something in it? Ps Is it right that some people consider the total energy in the universe to be zero?

Why not?

If you had infinite energy could you end up breaking the "fabric" of the universe ? (semi seriously) I mean "blow it apart"

Plus leeks and anything from the onion family? Is wine in sauces also bad?

I think vets prefer dogs are given dry food (in biscuit form). But dogs themselves generally like whatever you are having. I refuse to accommodate this behaviour but other family members feed them at the table like performing seals. I don't think it does too much harm if it is not overdone and ,anyway once the excitement of the human meal is over they will head off to finish it off with their own food from the bag and the bowl of water. They seem to have the eating arrangements down to a fine art.

Actually a reverie ,not a dream as such but I don't recall this kind of a dreamlike imagining before. It is quite simple.I created a character in the "story sequence" in my head and the next thing I know I am having "first person" thoughts in the mind of that character. To explain, in my "dream" I seemed to myself to be having thoughts (about what I don't recall) in my own identity(the way, I imagine we all do -everyday ,inconsequential thoughts or musings when we are awake) Then as I awake from my reverie it became apparent that these thoughts were being authored by the this character in my reverie or half dream. Not a dramatic dream as such ,but a different "architecture"to what I have experienced up to now. Anyone else had the same or similar?

As always worth pursuing but with the likelihood that my brain will not be able to cope with the complexity of the subject. My mind tends to be attracted to broad generalities(an excuse for lazy thinking?) rather than hard analysis. (I actually posted this in Philosophy before it was reallocated here) Still, I seem to follow your description so far.The input seems to be a bit like the drum in my washing machine ,providing dynamism to something of a comfortable ,academic arrangement between the software and hardware layers.(maybe the loose and inconsequential analogy would even extend to calling the water the software and the dirty clothes the hardware) One thing that occurs to me is that it must be possible to take the output from the system and return it to the input inlet. Maybe that is common practice? Aside from that ,do you agree with @Genady that the concept of software/hardware is not a thing that could have had any application in the earlier history of our civilization? It only emerged as a meaningful concept when computers were actually developed?(I think I have read that the Jacquard Loom was invented) was the earliest precursor of modern day computers. )

Well,I am wondering whether the concepts of software and hardware can usefully be applied to human activities in the times before what we would call computers were invented . Was,eg the abacus a primitive form of computing? Did it have a software component? Are there any other activities that could be said to be able to be described conceptually in the same way?

Sorry, you don't mean to say Philip (as in my example was using metaphors do you? Do you mean my "argument " is using metaphors?

If Philip laid the plans on paper for his entry in India ,could his soldiers'arms be viewed as hardware and his plans on paper or in his head as "software"(as a crude concept )? Aren't modern day computers sophisticated descendants of mental plans and concrete applications?

He could have been a software engineer at a time when Philip of Macedon was waging wars around the globe? Is it chicken and egg?Can you have one without the other?

But could he be a software engineer (at that level) if the hardware had not already been built? Is there not a symbiotic/two sides of the same coin relationship? At what stage in the history of computing (or machines?) could it be said that both hardware and software could be used to describe aspects of things?

I have no coding skills (apart from html) and so no expertise in computing at all. But I have often tried to grapple in my mind with the relationship between the concept of software versus hardware. In reality do these phenomena overlap or is there a strict demarcation ? I can see they have to interact or nothing will happen ,so is there a region that is composed of both elements? Any software has to be written onto a physical component .Is that physical component(eg a hard drive) considered part of the hardware ? Is everything physical inside the hard drive of a computer part of the hardware? Where does the software start ? Inside the mind if the coder?(but the brain is physical too) Is this a pointless question, just something to scratch one's head about when the practicalities are all that really matter?

Ever since the Great Leap Forward?(too tragic to be funny ,really)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNhlNSLQAFE Thought this was very entertaining as well as a trip back in time.(1964,I think) Did Feynman have a few lodgers in his head most of the time?