And, who really said that neurons cannot have connections with other things what are not neurons.

That is not explicitly said but actually implied by any materialist view of consciousness I'm aware of. It's just that materialists don't understand what the trouble with their point of view is - it they did, they wouldn't be materialists to start with.

Essentially, if all human experience can be reduced to neuronal activity, then no human experience can possibly refer to anything other than neuronal activity, including the experience of physical objects. That means the physical world is mental by the very materialistic definition of mind - something which does not exist. The materialist definition of a physical neuron ends up being completely equivalent with the subjective concept of a neuron, which then becomes the primary (and only) substance of the universe. Materialism is not a self-consistent explanation for reality.

• What about visual consciousness - yanniru - November 11, 2003 - 20:22 UTC
  • Visual thinking - aurino_ - November 12, 2003 - 13:27 UTC
    • So your statement is incorrect - yanniru - November 12, 2003 - 14:42 UTC
      • The statement WAS incorrect - that was my point - aurino_ - November 12, 2003 - 15:18 UTC
    • Visual Thinking - tkorrovi - November 12, 2003 - 16:55 UTC
      • I disagree - aurino_ - November 12, 2003 - 18:55 UTC
        • Re: I Disagree - tkorrovi - November 12, 2003 - 19:40 UTC
          • Welcome to the land of confusion - aurino_ - November 12, 2003 - 20:58 UTC
            • Don't like your land of confusion - tkorrovi - November 12, 2003 - 21:06 UTC
              • Neither do I, but there's little we can do about it - aurino__ - November 13, 2003 - 14:15 UTC
                • What is your big deal? - tkorrovi - November 13, 2003 - 15:18 UTC
                  • No big deal - aurino__ - November 13, 2003 - 15:44 UTC