Apparently, the assumption of dualists is that when competent philosophers and scientists agree to give talks at their “conference”s, then their views suddenly become scientifically credible! I am attempting to thwart this misdirection by the following open letter to two researchers whom I deeply respect:
Greetings Prof. Dennett and Prof. Markram,
I am an AGI researcher and a somewhat amateur philosopher. I was both astonished and relieved to see your names on the “Toward a Science of Consciousness” 2014 conference speakers list. I am an avid follower of your research, as you challenge many misconceptions about cognition and the brain. If you would not mind me requesting, in the name of good philosophy, could you please make sure that you solemnly and decisively denounce all forms of dualism, especially the more arcane/cryptic forms, such as property/predicate dualism, as unscientific (not scientific hypotheses) during your talks? It is quite possibly an unmatched opportunity to show to the greater intellectual community that the “philosophical work” of people like Chalmers and Hameroff is at best farcical. I would be most grateful if you would take a stand against pseudo-science. It is sorely needed, as I believe the pseudo-scientists are plotting to make it seem as if their views are respected by physicalists — a similar attempt was made recently at an event called Global Future 2045.
Here are my publications on the matter, should you wish to investigate
more why I have taken the pain to make such a request out of the blue:
Eray Ozkural, A compromise between reductionism and non-reductionism.
Worldviews, Science and Us – Philosophy and Complexity, University of
Liverpool, UK, 11 – 14 September 2005 link1 link2
Eray Ozkural, What Is It Like to Be a Brain Simulation? Artificial
General Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Volume 7716, 2012, pp 232-241 link1
Regards,
