That's not unreasonable (a sense in which most people most of the time are not acting or thinking with much consciousness), but it depends what consciousness really is I guess.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Categorical questions (“is”) tend to be both vociferously debated and patently unprofitable.

I tend to discount the (unstated) benefit of categorizing a thought process as “consciousness” vs. not.

OK but I don't think this is just a categorization problem, the interesting problem here, for me, is defining consciousness. Particularly because of ethics.

I don’t see how ethics requires hard categorization of consciousness. Ethical questions, routinely deal with various levels of consciousness, such as animals, or people with diminished capacity, such as coma patients.

Yeah i agree it's not binary.